|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 28 post(s) |
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
2025
   |
Posted - 2014.05.17 17:44:00 -
[1] - Quote
Great first post, thanks for the information and opening up this discussion. I also enjoyed watching your fanfest presentation which I will be referencing back to frequently.
CCP Z wrote:
We will offer a Respec Option (which does not exist in DUST 514). More information will come down the line as the projectGÇÖs development progresses.
This part concerns me. In light of the fanfest presentation the respec option seems to be a corrosive one.
If the progression tree is created to be accessible and useful to new players then the need for a respec is greatly reduced, even more so with the inclusion of a more effective matchmaking system (meta score) and the more robust academy experience.
Adding a respec also seems to reduce the value of the long term diversity intended in the progression system (again as per fanfest). It is obvious that removing all by the proto version of a weapon or piece of gear, such as you described with the mass driver, removes a certain aspect of player choice. You do a good job of presenting the benefits of this change, but how are those benefits, such as long term exploration of the game, going to exist in an environment with repeatable limitless respecs?
Further, while I adamantly support your preservation of the ability to mix and match mods, weapons, suits et al once unlocked, how are you going to prevent (even within the meta score system) massive FotM swings (and the economic shocks that come with them) from negatively impacting the games meta and NPE? N
New players will bear a greater burden from FotM under a limitless respec system in that they will not have as much SP to reallocate and thus a lessor ability to customize. The advantage provided by more SP under your proposed progression system without respecs seems robust and balance by the meaningful choices a player makes within that persistent context, with respecs however the value of the progression system is largely eroded as vet players will now be able to run whatever combination they so desire and will have the deeper knowledge of min/maxing in game systems so that even the meta score will be unlikely to truly mitigate a new type of proto stomping.
(To be clear, I am speaking very literally here about the total number of respecs per character. I am not commenting on the frequency of respecs.) I realize the details of the respec system have not be released yet which is why I feel this is an appropriate time to bring these concerns to the fore, prior to that system being finalized and unveiled.
Moving on;
- Meta Score appears to be a great conceptual way to enhance matchmaking
- BPO dropsuits, and player stats attached to them, is an elegant way to add a sense of persistence for players without removing the risk vs reward of the sandbox (as fittings will still be consumed and have real costs in time, ISK and SP).
- A shift towards Tiericide within weapons is appealing but needs to be handled carefully so as not do deviate into a Diablo style loot grind (the Diablo games are fun in their own right, but just like EVE:O should not be directly copy-pasted over Legion nor should games like DIII be role models for how Legion functions)
- Player market - This is key to many aspects of the game, having it sooner rather than later is very important, and avoiding an oversimplified "auction house" method is vital. This is the single area most important to take inspiration from EVE:O in that working towards a player market, a true asset life cycle and a market economy which contains meaningful elements of location, supply, and dynamic change are all highly pertinent. Of course, just like in the history of EVE:O some of this will be built over time, but as a high level goal I cannot state enough how important this aspect is.
- We are in New Eden - The existence of Legion within New Eden, not simply within the New Eden IP, is also very important. One key aspect of that is not to make it dependent in EVE:O, which you've made strong strides toward with the current progression system in when and how you are introducing the races. Please continue to have that same outlook advise other aspects of development.
I realize my last two points are arguably outside of progression, however they are important to consider as progression is defined, as they hold implications for balance, accessibility, etc of the very items being unlocked and effected by the progression system.
I'll wrap up my first post in this discussion by reiterating that while I understand respecs are an often requested mechanic they still seem like a very risky, and hasty, design choice as I have yet to see even a theoretical method by which unlimited respecs can exist while still legitimately maintaining a meaningful and persistant sandbox. In short, if you start to remove the risks you denigrate the value of the rewards and stifle both emotional investiture and emergent game play.
0.02 ISK
Cross
PS ~ Now to go and read the other 23 pages of this thread.
SupportSP Rollover & an improved Recruting System
|
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
2025
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 17:58:00 -
[2] - Quote
Jonny D Buelle wrote:Heinz Doofenshertz wrote:CCP Z wrote:
We will offer a Respec Option (which does not exist in DUST 514). More information will come down the line as the projectGÇÖs development progresses.
While I agree that in some games a Respec option is a good thing. as you may get to a point in the game where all the choices you have made are completely obsolete or bad. In New Eden no choice should ever be made lightly, nor should they be easily changed. As no spent skill is every really wasted, it might not be useful right now, but you may run into a situation later on where you'll need it and wow I already have that skill. New Eden is very much a place of choices, however, making a choice needs to have weight as it does now. I play Logi, and Assault, if I spend skill points into a heavy tree to test it out and decide I don't like how it plays fine. but I shouldn't be able to just undo those choices. There are limited occasons I would say respecs ok. The end of the NPE, because you just finished learning how to play and probably made bad choices before learning how important choices are. When major changes to the skill system are made, IE you removed 15 skills I had, refunding those points I'm ok with. Making it so that I decide I don't like the skills I have paying 5 bucks and being able to completely redo my entire tree smacks all the choices in the face, and then hampers me in my ability to use the new gear I just got, because I have not properly progressed thru the tree learning how this style plays. which means I might also not like it. I know many people are used to this being an option in other games, but it does not really fit with New Eden. yes it makes it a bit harder for some, and makes others think they are trapped with bad choices, but this is because they didn't understand the system in the first place and don't understand why it is that way. If these are addressed early on in the NPE, like having people pick certain skills, explaining that choices are important and that, as I suggested above they can reassign them once they finish, but afterwards their choices both with their skills and their trigger pulls are important, and needed to be treated that way. I would like to point out to you that EVE does offer a variation of a respec in the form of Remapping your attributes (Wisdom, Charisma, Endurance etc.) to better suit your progression in the game. Yes it is different than a respec but it can still be considered respeccing. (source and reading on remapping https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Neural_remapping) You do make some valid points, and I agree that the respec should only be given at the end of NPE. God knows how grateful I was when 1.0 came with a full respec. I messed up massively in my first month. I think that if CCP does intend to do respecs, make it a yearly thing and even then only a partial respec. EG: Respec Weaponry, Respec Dropsuit Command etc.
Remapping is a very real thing, you are correct.
It is not however in any sense a respec.
Remapping is a persistent choice, once yearly you can alter your attributes to specialize your future SP gains.
It does not alter any currently existing skills, it does not refund anything, and the enhanced training speed gained within the specialized areas comes at the cost of reduced training speed in the areas outside of that specialization.
Remapping allows for high level player manipulation of their planed skill progression, what it does not do is offer an 'out' from the ramifications or persistence of any choice a player has already made.
All of that being said, a one time only free respec coming out of the Academy seems reasonable, as does the occasional allowance of SP reallocation in the face of any total skill tree overhaul/the outright removal of specific skills, but such cases should be vanishingly rare and certainly not a planned recurring feature.
0.02 ISK Cross
SupportSP Rollover & an improved Recruting System
|
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
2030
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 21:33:00 -
[3] - Quote
Leeroy Gannarsein wrote:TrueXer0z wrote:KDR in the game means next to nothing, but WP and ISK efficiency means a lot. When you can field 100k isk on the field and destroy 2 million worth of isk..it should mean something. Same with WPs. If you average 1500+ WP per match is should mean something compared to someone averaging 900-1000 WPs. The only real thing I see KDR showing is the likelyhood of a person draining clone count. But if that person is enabling the team to win by removing high value targets from the field...where is the break away? While to a certain (okay, significant) extent this is true, when I'm playing solo, as I have been doing for a while now, I play ambush solely. And in ambush, KDR = everything.
Actually even in pure ambush KDR still isn't everything, or even an accurate directly useful metric.
Example 1:
A merc in Ambush who dies 10 times kills 5 times and is revived 10 times has a poor KDR but has cost the team 0 clones, has lost 0 ISK, has contributed to squad WP earnings and has depleted some hostile ammunition and time.
A merc driven by KDR to insta-bleed who dies even just twice has already cost the team more resources.
Example 2:
A merc that spends the whole game providing DS deployment, Active scans, nanohives, reps, or any other support activity could easily end up with a KDR of 0.0 while still providing more WP, ISK savings, vicariously contributing to hostile asset destruction et al than a merc who goes 10/0 only killing.
Example 3:
A merc that goes 2/3 doesn't have a very good KDR but if those 2 kills are against ADS, Mads, or G-Logi and said merc has also been suppressing them the rest of the game that merc contributes more to tactical value, ISK efficiency, et al than many infantry with higher KDR.
In conclusion:]/b] KDR is far to vague, it's meaning far to situation and 'blurry', to be a directly useful metric and should be replaced by the array of more specific metrics which it can theoretically represent.
It should at the absolute [b]minimum not be used in end of match leaderboards, the current practice of which feeds new players the a host of misconceptions which can cause sub-optimal game play damaging to squad, team, match outcome, and ultimate their own and everyone elses fun as they repeat ineffective actions without understanding why those actions don't bring victory.
It is bad pratice to mislead players, and KDR does that.
0.02 ISK
Cross
SupportSP Rollover & an improved Recruting System
|
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
2030
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:02:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP Z wrote:1st batch of answers: Quote:Can whatever system you put in place be change after launch ,like the 3 different trees we had from beta till now in Dust? We are trying to create the best system for Legion, so I would say no.
I would respectfully suggest to my fellow gamers that this is why we should be constructively participating in the discussion of Legion right now rather than waiting for it to be greenlit, in beta, et al.
Quote:Quote:With a PC game can't you do both the new easy progression and keep the lvl 5 system so we can just get what we want since we know what we want. Yes we could keep the 5 levels. From the studies and the research we made on DUST, people seems to not understand it. ThatGÇÖs why we want to remove it.
Do you feel it is necessary to remove all levels of skill progression or simply the 5 level standard?
Clearly there were some wasted levels in the current system, and while I enjoy the current system it is evident how such a system could present a barrier to new players. With the progression system presented at Fanfest do you see any room for certain skills to either have more than one level or have offshoots providing additional nodes that would in essence function like further levels of the skill but go only so far as they are actually useful (thus removing the potential for miscalculated SP investment or pressure to shoehorn extra stats into a skill set which has served it's design goal?
SupportSP Rollover & an improved Recruting System
|
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
2030
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:03:00 -
[5] - Quote
pt 2
Quote:Quote:Are the weapons of each dropsuit tree race specific as Gallentee have Assault rifle but no scrambler or rail rifle? No, weapon types will be linked to Role and not necessarily Race. You will end up with 2 different Rail Rifle depending on the race though.
Just to reiterate fully however, once unlocked those weapons can be used in any fit/with any suit so regardless of race or role correct? (with the possible exception of special cases such has Heavy Weapons)
Quote:Quote:Will electronics and engineering skills still that bring those numbers as cpu and pg still be in the game? Yes Quote:how will you implement passive skills and bonuses? They will be a node to unlock (same as a new weapon, Drop Suit or module)
Good to know passive skills and fittings enhancement options are still on the table.
SupportSP Rollover & an improved Recruting System
|
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
2030
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 22:04:00 -
[6] - Quote
pt 3
CCP Z wrote:
Respec will have a gradually increasing cost, so your choices matter
Not to be disrespectful but I'm going to continue to be insistent on this point of discussion. Even with increasing costs, especially of those costs only increase gradually, limitless respecs are still limitless and as such all of my prior concerns are still unanswered. If there is a method on offer which theoretically addresses those concerns then I would still like to hear it, but in the absence of that limitless respecs seem to remain a very poor idea.
As an aside; the cost in question if such a respec program were ever to ender the game clearly coudl not be in IRL funds or Legion will be swimming in the rocky shoals of P2W. If on the other hand the cost in question is paied in SP itself that would have some potential mitigation however it still fails to sidestep the extra advantage it gives vets over new players.
Further I'd like to draw your attention back to my specific questions regarding how respecs will effect the stated goals of your progression system and the NPE.
All balance and re-balance concerns aside (which could be a discussion on their own) limitless respecs stifle emergent game play. There is no reason to find a new innovative use for something when you can simply reallocate your massive SP bank into whatever you wish. There is no, or minimal, stable baseline for a meta to develop and draw from.
There is no mechanical barrier to 'boom and bust' economic cycles within the game causing market shocks and diminishing meaningful player driven economics.
Using EVE as an example (even though EVE:O isn't a direct corollary) if you allowed the same type of respec then characters could allocate to research, mine, produce and then fly their own Titan not only gutting current incentive for social interaction (and thus player retention and emergent game play) but deeply disadvantaging any new players to the game as they will no longer have any niche to fill of value to any "I can do anything with the click of a button" veterans.
Lest we be unclear the possible respec costs are as follows;
- Out of game assets, which would lead Legion into a P2W situation
- In game assets, which would be no meaningful barrier to vets thus magnifying the degradation respecs cause to the NPE and new player retention.
- In game SP, which if based on a raw total value punishes players with low SP total more for using the feature than it does those with high.
- In game SP, which if based on a scaling % value more equally constrains players at all levels but still allows far more flex and leverage to vets who can simply calculate the amount of SP to leave unallocated as the cost of their next respec and bank that amount patch by patch thus still feeding into all market and FotM concerns mentioned previously.
Cheers,
Cross
SupportSP Rollover & an improved Recruting System
|
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
2073
|
Posted - 2014.05.19 20:54:00 -
[7] - Quote
Maken Tosch wrote:Himiko Kuronaga wrote:I have seen no proof whatsoever that a lack of understanding the skill system plagued the majority of players. I believe they simply quit because the game was horrible and, by default, never got a chance to learn the skill system as a result.
Whatever exit survey Z conducted was likely tainted. That's also part of it. But the topic of skill progression came up every now and then. Not as much as the topics of lag, broken PC mechanics, protostomping, and being put into a match in progress did, but when the topic of skill progression came up (often under the topic of respecs) it was almost always a heated debate on how it should be fixed. On the one side you had people like me saying no to respecs while advocating a more clear and concise set of tools that can aid a player in better understanding the game. This eventually brought up the idea of overhauling the academy as part of the solution. On the other side you had people saying yes to respecs simple on the basis that the skill progression system is broken and players need a chance to undo their mistakes which was the result of not being able to fully understand the skill progression. Of course another idea was allowing players to just let them play around with the SP allocation just for the fun of it (an idea often proposed by the scrubby FOTM chasers). EDIT: I forgot to mention that the pro-respec side also referred to the fact that some people didn't like certain play styles they tried earlier and feel that SP invested in those skills were wasted SP.
On a side note related to this, often the "skill progression system is broken" set were actually talking about effects from weapon rebalances. Yes they wanted skill points back but it wasn't due to the skill tree being unclear so much as a specific weapon/suit/bit of gear being rebalanced and thus losing the type/degree of functionality that they'd come to expect. Also flavor text, which is perhaps part of the skill tree, caused trouble when someone would read the fluff about how a given item/skill should work and then the skill or item did not in fact work that way.
This is to say that even among those who were frustrated (often rightfully) about their skill progression, the causal element wasn't actually rooted within the skill system.
0.02 ISK
Cross
Cross Atu for CPM1- An emergent candidate
|
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
2372
|
Posted - 2014.06.16 14:11:00 -
[8] - Quote
Mary Sedillo wrote:I am not asking for the same progression, but what is going to happen to our skillpoints?! The ones we were accumulating for near a year now?!
Those should be transferring
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2182657#post2182657
Also:
I'd love an update on the state of intent/design with regards to the progression system in Legion.
We've had a lot of conversation on the subject and an update in status ah la CCP Rattatis hotfix 'patch notes' would be a real asset at this point.
Cheers,
Cross
Cross Atu for CPM1- An emergent candidate
|
|
|
| |
|