DUST Search - Sticky:[DISCUSSION]

Ulysses Knapse wrote:

Tallen Ellecon wrote:

SponkSponkSponk wrote:

iliel wrote:

Is the Legion progression tree idea like that of Planetside 2?

If you don't know, pick up a copy of PS2 and try it.

If it is like PS2, then I recommend rethinking the idea. PS2's progression tree is horrible, makes the game incredibly boring, and will ultimately kill it.

If it is not like PS2's progression, please explain how it is different.

From what I understand, it's a bit like PS2 in that there's unlocks based on role.

What Legion does differently is that once you unlock something, you can use it in any fit you want.

If this is true, IDK why we don't just keep the old tree and have a mastery/certificate system that with a proper UI will be identical to Zs tree, but still allow customization without barriers to the more in depth players?

Because CCP Z doesn't care. He's a newcomer, after all. He has no attachment to the game or the community.

At least, that's what his actions say.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 28 post(s)
Tallen Ellecon 1924	Posted - 2014.05.14 21:17:00 - [1] - Quote Fox Gaden wrote: You would not believe how many people I have encountered who thought that all Snipers should ware the Scout suit because the Sniper in the early DUST ads is in a Scout suit. With the role system in place, the masses are going to react to any attempt at thinking outside the box with scorn and suspicion, because CCP told us all what roles to play and how to setup our suit. Of course, being a rebel has a certain appeal... Ironically I use a shotgun in a heavy suit and snipe in a scout suit.
Tallen Ellecon 1925	Posted - 2014.05.14 23:13:00 - [2] - Quote It appears that the direction see Legion going in terms of skill progression is..... Sandbox to them means no hand holding so we opt for intuitive progression over deep customization. This frees up the resources required towards an ISIS or tutorial system that aids ALL players. It's very flawed and it's a solution that won't bring any longevity. NPE is on the top of my list for priorities, if people don't play, there is nobody to play with and nobody to pay for the game, pretty simple. Dust had issues with showing new players the ropes and getting them into it, I know this personally because I'd spend hours with new recruits explaining everything they'd need to know before skilling into something, The system itself wasn't totally flawed, but other mechanics definitely were. Things that hurt NPE in Dust now. A) Handing them a bunch of precious SP, and not explaining the best way to spend it. This I believe is what you're trying to remedy, but it wasn't the skill tree itself, but a couple of other factors. 1) Obvious imbalance of weapons, this made investing in things like a Plasma Cannon or Laser Rifle early on a burden. 2) Lack of PVE or testing grounds made it impossible to try things without investing in them. With PVE a weapon only needs to be powerful enough to destroy an AI target, not necessarily another veteran player who is prepared to survive 3) Having SP sink gates in, such as the basic frame skill, dropsuit command, etc. etc. adds more useless content and unnecessary confusion B) Lack of in depth tutorial or resources. 1) Add an ISIS or certificate/mastery system, this is a feature that is very useful to both new and old players alike. The proposed progression system can reach the same goal with references such as these, without forcing someone down a linear path they may not like as it progresses. 2) The battle academy was a joke, if PVE is what you all have in mind, just make a basic tutorial system with PVE. Add an academy later so people can practice at their own pace. 3) Make finding a corp easier, get comms everywhere. On a PC it's easier to type in a help chat, make it easily accessible throughout the start. C) Lack of gamemodes and matchmaking 1) Keep new players away from groups like Nyain San. If casual new players and end of game veterans don't have the option or incentive to play separate from each other you will retain no new players. 2) Again, PVE is vital. Casual and Co Op play needs to exist for those who want an escape and not a second job. Things that new system hurts. A) Deep customization, honestly you can try to simplify and dumb down everything for more players, but they won't last like they have in EVE. Linear progression creates a grind to the top scheme, which only ends with reaching the top and either 1) Starting all over again from the bottom of a new path 2) Leaving. B) Ownership of role and setup. My favorite heavy setup is a speed tanked Gallente Shotgunner. It fits the lore and the mechanic in EVE. That setup is outside the traditional role, but whenever I start singing "shotgun heavy" in my old timey blues tone, my corp knows what I'm talking about. If that setup requires extra progression or two separate paths to work into, you define what each role should be and leave a lot of fun creativity out which isneeded for a sandbox. C) Customization isn't just discouraged, it's prohibited. EVE ships all carry bonuses towards certain weapons and modules helping them to maximize a role, but you don't need to spec into Amarr frigates to use energy weapons. From the start I can make Gallente frigates shooting lasers and nothing will stop me. The ISIS and mastery systems would recommend I use Hybrid weapons and the role bonuses are best used with the recommended guns, but they aren't exclusive. D) Still no EVE style tiericide, make progression be more about specialization and customization than simply getting better versions of previous things. These create an SP sink for older players without making lower SP players completely outmatched. I don't mean to be repetitive this stuff has been stated over and over again, but it's imperative that Legion learns from the problems of Dusts NPE and see the strengths of EVE and Dusts skill progression. CCP Z I know your intentions are good, and you are reacting to the issues you and your "test groups" had with Dust and the NPE, but there are ways to get people to stay longer than the first couple of hours that don't stand in the way of what makes people want to stay for years. We're all here to help make Legion the sandbox we all dream of and we thank you for the feedback.
Tallen Ellecon 1926	Posted - 2014.05.14 23:42:00 - [3] - Quote Fox Gaden wrote: Kevall Longstride wrote: Maybe I'm being a little over sensitive here but I'm beginning to detect a very disturbing undercurrent of dismissing 'casual players' as not being worthy enough or too stupid to join our game. I hope I'm misreading that. We are saying that if you target hardcore players (while trying to accommodate casual players), then casual players will flock around each of the Hardcore players. How many casual players have stayed with DUST because of you and I? If they target casual players and make the game uninteresting for hardcore players, then the hardcore players will leave, and then the casual players will not have anything to latch onto and they will leave as well. If I feel like there is nothing left to learn in the game, I will leave, and find a new game to learn. I like games were I am constantly learning and being challenged. I like to think of myself as a middle ground player, slightly more towards the hardcore. I see exactly where Vell0cet is coming from and from a business perspective he is totally right. From a gameplay perspective though the whole point of F2P game is that though people may not all be paying, they add more to the content. Especially in a sandbox more active bodies working in the world is better than a few highly invested ones..... you need both. This is where the challenge is and balance has to be made. Give any player enough tools to understand the in depth mechanics from a practical sense and they don't necessarily have to invest a lot of time, effort, and money to help the game. TF2 is a perfect example of a F2P game I can pick up every couple of months, get into, play for awhile, and leave. TF2 has the F2P in depth longevity versus casual play balance figured out, and I think both Legion and Valkyrie are looking at that as a reference. The hard core players pay most of the funds while the casual players fuel the content, in a sense a win win. If they want to simplify the interface, tutorial system, and have an ISIS equivalent without dumbing down or streamlining the skill tree itself I think they could draw in both types of players.
Tallen Ellecon 1929	Posted - 2014.05.15 06:15:00 - [4] - Quote Thank You CCP Z Seriously, you're thinking outside the box that's good. You're answering our questions, even the tough ones, we really like that. So to be fair in this scenario you will be the Devil and I'll support as far as I can tell is your plan for skill progression and gear. First off lets for a moment not pretend like the skill system in EVE or Dust is only understandable by smart people. I know a lot of smart people who would rather not take the time to understand EVE or DUST, and I know a lot of less than average intelligence people that do (exhibit A : the war room) 1)Skill Tree So in our current system there is little to no explanation on how anything works. Before the battle academy a new player pretty much had no hope outside of a paragraph of texts per section. There are so many things to choose from. Without explaining what a drop suit is or what the weapons are some new player may invest in a heavy weapon not realizing they can't fit it on a light suit.... it's a mess. Most of us can't imagine how alien most of this game is. In legion the proposal is that you pick a familiar class or role from the start. From there you will be guided to the relevant weapons, modules, and upgrades. I'm not completely sure if you can only use weapons and equipment from a certain suit tree on that suit, or if you can only unlock it that way. Either way it becomes intuitive enough from the first hour or so that someone won't leave out of frustration with the skill tree. I don't fear change, but I am cautious. I don't know why an ISIS/ Mastery/Certificate system won't accomplish the same goal without reducing customization or locking people into set roles. If you want a suit to stick to a particular role give it a lot of bonuses towards particular modules and gear. The EVE skill tree seems like a complicated mess, until you put it into an interface like ISIS, that guides players the best way to fill out ships and roles. 2)Gear First off keeping suits BPOs and raising the prices of weapons and modules isn't a terrible idea. I just don't see the point unless it was a form of tiericide. I also think making higher meta level gear rarer in an open market is a great way to balance out equipment in game. Since no one manufactures high tiered gear currently it's demand in no way influences the price, nor does the cost of material. I think it's a good way to balance weapons, assuming there is an open market of some sort. Less used weapons would become less expensive, and flavor of the month would be very pricey. The reasoning for making all suits BPOs doesn't make sense to me. I'm not wearing proto all the time not because I don't feel a connection or ownership. It's because A) Compared to pub payouts, it doesn't make a big enough difference to justify the cost. B) I can accomplish the same goals in lower tiers. C) Most players are in lower tiered suits anyway, so it feels more balanced. My pride in my suit comes from how I fit it, not how much SP I invested into it. This is why I'm for tiericide, I'm not working at making a suit better than it was yesterday, but I want to make it more attuned to my playstyle. Other than those things, most everything else about Legion seems like a good idea. I'm interested to hear more about PVE, player market and possible logistics with EVE (moving tanks from one system to the next). I just want a sandbox that doesn't hold back where it doesn't have to. CCP Z you're taking a lot of flak because this is the biggest thing we've heard from you and we're just trying to understand how these mechanics will make the game better.
Tallen Ellecon 1929	Posted - 2014.05.15 06:21:00 - [5] - Quote SponkSponkSponk wrote: iliel wrote: Is the Legion progression tree idea like that of Planetside 2? If you don't know, pick up a copy of PS2 and try it. If it is like PS2, then I recommend rethinking the idea. PS2's progression tree is horrible, makes the game incredibly boring, and will ultimately kill it. If it is not like PS2's progression, please explain how it is different. From what I understand, it's a bit like PS2 in that there's unlocks based on role. What Legion does differently is that once you unlock something, you can use it in any fit you want. If this is true, IDK why we don't just keep the old tree and have a mastery/certificate system that with a proper UI will be identical to Zs tree, but still allow customization without barriers to the more in depth players?
Tallen Ellecon 1929	Posted - 2014.05.15 06:30:00 - [6] - Quote Ulysses Knapse wrote: Tallen Ellecon wrote: SponkSponkSponk wrote: iliel wrote: Is the Legion progression tree idea like that of Planetside 2? If you don't know, pick up a copy of PS2 and try it. If it is like PS2, then I recommend rethinking the idea. PS2's progression tree is horrible, makes the game incredibly boring, and will ultimately kill it. If it is not like PS2's progression, please explain how it is different. From what I understand, it's a bit like PS2 in that there's unlocks based on role. What Legion does differently is that once you unlock something, you can use it in any fit you want. If this is true, IDK why we don't just keep the old tree and have a mastery/certificate system that with a proper UI will be identical to Zs tree, but still allow customization without barriers to the more in depth players? Because CCP Z doesn't care. He's a newcomer, after all. He has no attachment to the game or the community. At least, that's what his actions say. I try to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I'm starting to agree with you.
Tallen Ellecon 1934	Posted - 2014.05.15 15:43:00 - [7] - Quote Celus Ivara wrote: Long thought out counterpoint Though I don't agree 100% it's good to see the other side of the argument.
Tallen Ellecon 1935	Posted - 2014.05.15 16:12:00 - [8] - Quote I'm for redoing the skill tree. I'm for a more informative UI (ISIS) I'm against locking people into roles..... this is my only concern.