And it's more than just Dropsuit Command doing nothing at level 5.
- Some skills unlock gear at 1/3/5.
- Others unlock gear at 1/2/3/4/5.
- Some skills give buffs to gear (confusingly called "efficacy"), in addition to unlocking gear.
- There's "core skills" that give universal buffs to suits.
- "Hacking" gives universal buffs, while ALSO unlocking gear.
- Skills exist that have no purpose other than unlocking other skills.
- "Which of these 4 shield skills is the one that gives me more health?"
- To figure out what an item is you have to leave the skill menu, enter the Market, press the secret "Show Info" button, and toggle out of the flavor text to the attributes.

Secondly, many here are making the argument: "The present skill tree is EVE's skill-tree, and EVE's skill-tree is perfect so why are we changing it?"
There's two parts to this argument so let's break it down:

1: "The present skill-tree is EVE's skill-tree,..."
Actually it's not.
EVE's system relies upon Attributes, implants, neural remaps, solely Passive learning of a specific skill, subscriptions, and EVE bonuses are granted by the Ships after checking the Skill level while Dust bonuses are granted by the Skill to the Dropsuits (which sounds like the same thing, but is different and subtly causes massive issues for balancing), ...to name but a few.

2: "...EVE's skill-tree is perfect so why are we changing it?"
EVE's skill-tree was not pulled from the Ark of the Covenant. Nor is it Euler's Identity, nor a pyrite crystal.
It's a "messy" solution cobbled together by human hands in response to a very specific problem.

It has had both in the past (eg: Learning Skills) and today (eg: Drone Skills) many issues.
It is not an immaculate solution to a shared problem.


Lastly, there is another argument people are making: "Dust/Legion should be EVE, but on the planets. And thus we should be mimicking EVE's gameplay as much as possible."
This is obviously related to the above statement, but comes at it from the angle of gameplay as opposed to the skill-tree.
As such, I'll respond to it from a different angle.

Allow me to be straightforward:
EVE is an amazing sandbox,
with battles where thousands of players led by gods tear away at each other,
filled with spying, politics and altruism,
where your cunning and ambition shape your future as much as any character stats you may have.
EVE is a glorious story-engine with one teeny-tiny problem:
It is not fun to play.

Do you want Planetary Conquest 2.0 to be a 5 hour POS grind?
Do you want PvE to be so simplistic many people bot it with trivial programs?
Do you want to have to run two accounts at once to have access to basic reconnaissance?
Do you want Dust to also become the "game you play while you're doing something else"?
Should Dust be "Spreadsheets on Planets"?

If you think that sounds great then you know what? That's fine!
Only you know what you find fun. No one can tell you otherwise. :)
But here's the thing, that game already exists, it's called EVE Online.
EVE is very, very, very good at being EVE.

But if you want a sandbox/MMO/FPS, well we're going to have build that.
And since no other game has done that, we'll have to invent.
Which means iteration.
Which means occasionally tearing down the old and replacing it with the new.


Our present skill system works.
But by no means does it work well.

Let's find something that does. :)

(A note: My apologies at quoting you Ulysses, I'm actually addressing many people at once with this post.)

Firstly, the skill tree we're using in Dust has some deep intrinsic problems in it. It makes sense to us because we've been using it for the last year, but it is hyper unintuitive to the new player.

And it's more than just Dropsuit Command doing nothing at level 5.
- Some skills unlock gear at 1/3/5.
- Others unlock gear at 1/2/3/4/5.
- Some skills give buffs to gear (confusingly called "efficacy"), in addition to unlocking gear.
- There's "core skills" that give universal buffs to suits.
- "Hacking" gives universal buffs, while ALSO unlocking gear.
- Skills exist that have no purpose other than unlocking other skills.
- "Which of these 4 shield skills is the one that gives me more health?"
- To figure out what an item is you have to leave the skill menu, enter the Market, press the secret "Show Info" button, and toggle out of the flavor text to the attributes.

Yes. Our present skill tree "works".
But by no means does it "work well".

I know it's counter-intuitive, but user-friendly and deep are not mutually exclusive things.
There is a difference between bad-complexity and good-complexity.


Secondly, many here are making the argument: "The present skill tree is EVE's skill-tree, and EVE's skill-tree is perfect so why are we changing it?"
There's two parts to this argument so let's break it down:

1: "The present skill-tree is EVE's skill-tree,..."
Actually it's not.
EVE's system relies upon Attributes, implants, neural remaps, solely Passive learning of a specific skill, subscriptions, and EVE bonuses are granted by the Ships after checking the Skill level while Dust bonuses are granted by the Skill to the Dropsuits (which sounds like the same thing, but is different and subtly causes massive issues for balancing), ...to name but a few.

Just as I've taught many FPS players how the Dust skill-tree works, I've also taught EVE players how Dust works and they've been just as confused.


2: "...EVE's skill-tree is perfect so why are we changing it?"
EVE's skill-tree was not pulled from the Ark of the Covenant. Nor is it Euler's Identity, nor a pyrite crystal.
It's a "messy" solution cobbled together by human hands in response to a very specific problem.

It has had both in the past (eg: Learning Skills) and today (eg: Drone Skills) many issues.
It is not an immaculate solution to a shared problem.


Lastly, there is another argument people are making: "Dust/Legion should be EVE, but on the planets. And thus we should be mimicking EVE's gameplay as much as possible."
This is obviously related to the above statement, but comes at it from the angle of gameplay as opposed to the skill-tree.
As such, I'll respond to it from a different angle.

Allow me to be straightforward:
EVE is an amazing sandbox,
with battles where thousands of players led by gods tear away at each other,
filled with spying, politics and altruism,
where your cunning and ambition shape your future as much as any character stats you may have.
EVE is a glorious story-engine with one teeny-tiny problem:
It is not fun to play.

Do you want Planetary Conquest 2.0 to be a 5 hour POS grind?
Do you want PvE to be so simplistic many people bot it with trivial programs?
Do you want to have to run two accounts at once to have access to basic reconnaissance?
Do you want Dust to also become the "game you play while you're doing something else"?
Should Dust be "Spreadsheets on Planets"?

If you think that sounds great then you know what? That's fine!
Only you know what you find fun. No one can tell you otherwise. :)
But here's the thing, that game already exists, it's called EVE Online.
EVE is very, very, very good at being EVE.

But if you want a sandbox/MMO/FPS, well we're going to have build that.
And since no other game has done that, we'll have to invent.
Which means iteration.
Which means occasionally tearing down the old and replacing it with the new.


Our present skill system works.
But by no means does it work well.

Let's find something that does. :)

Excellent post :-)
+1

It's very important to quote the post above yours just to be certain, especially if it is incredibly long and contains other quotes.

Indeed. The only time you can get away with no quoting is if you are referring directly to the OP.

Indeed. The only time you can get away with no quoting is if you are referring directly to the OP.

Current system is bad, we get it. That's why I suggested redoing it but better.

What would you recommend?

(A note: My apologies at quoting you Ulysses, I'm actually addressing many people at once with this post.)

Firstly, the skill tree we're using in Dust has some deep intrinsic problems in it. It makes sense to us because we've been using it for the last year, but it is hyper unintuitive to the new player.

And it's more than just Dropsuit Command doing nothing at level 5.
- Some skills unlock gear at 1/3/5.
- Others unlock gear at 1/2/3/4/5.
- Some skills give buffs to gear (confusingly called "efficacy"), in addition to unlocking gear.
- There's "core skills" that give universal buffs to suits.
- "Hacking" gives universal buffs, while ALSO unlocking gear.
- Skills exist that have no purpose other than unlocking other skills.
- "Which of these 4 shield skills is the one that gives me more health?"
- To figure out what an item is you have to leave the skill menu, enter the Market, press the secret "Show Info" button, and toggle out of the flavor text to the attributes.

Yes. Our present skill tree "works".
But by no means does it "work well".

I know it's counter-intuitive, but user-friendly and deep are not mutually exclusive things.
There is a difference between bad-complexity and good-complexity.


Secondly, many here are making the argument: "The present skill tree is EVE's skill-tree, and EVE's skill-tree is perfect so why are we changing it?"
There's two parts to this argument so let's break it down:

1: "The present skill-tree is EVE's skill-tree,..."
Actually it's not.
EVE's system relies upon Attributes, implants, neural remaps, solely Passive learning of a specific skill, subscriptions, and EVE bonuses are granted by the Ships after checking the Skill level while Dust bonuses are granted by the Skill to the Dropsuits (which sounds like the same thing, but is different and subtly causes massive issues for balancing), ...to name but a few.

Just as I've taught many FPS players how the Dust skill-tree works, I've also taught EVE players how Dust works and they've been just as confused.


2: "...EVE's skill-tree is perfect so why are we changing it?"
EVE's skill-tree was not pulled from the Ark of the Covenant. Nor is it Euler's Identity, nor a pyrite crystal.
It's a "messy" solution cobbled together by human hands in response to a very specific problem.

It has had both in the past (eg: Learning Skills) and today (eg: Drone Skills) many issues.
It is not an immaculate solution to a shared problem.


Lastly, there is another argument people are making: "Dust/Legion should be EVE, but on the planets. And thus we should be mimicking EVE's gameplay as much as possible."
This is obviously related to the above statement, but comes at it from the angle of gameplay as opposed to the skill-tree.
As such, I'll respond to it from a different angle.

Allow me to be straightforward:
EVE is an amazing sandbox,
with battles where thousands of players led by gods tear away at each other,
filled with spying, politics and altruism,
where your cunning and ambition shape your future as much as any character stats you may have.
EVE is a glorious story-engine with one teeny-tiny problem:
It is not fun to play.

Do you want Planetary Conquest 2.0 to be a 5 hour POS grind?
Do you want PvE to be so simplistic many people bot it with trivial programs?
Do you want to have to run two accounts at once to have access to basic reconnaissance?
Do you want Dust to also become the "game you play while you're doing something else"?
Should Dust be "Spreadsheets on Planets"?

If you think that sounds great then you know what? That's fine!
Only you know what you find fun. No one can tell you otherwise. :)
But here's the thing, that game already exists, it's called EVE Online.
EVE is very, very, very good at being EVE.

But if you want a sandbox/MMO/FPS, well we're going to have build that.
And since no other game has done that, we'll have to invent.
Which means iteration.
Which means occasionally tearing down the old and replacing it with the new.


Our present skill system works.
But by no means does it work well.

Let's find something that does. :)

And I am strongly working doing the opposite for the reasons stated 20 times in this thread :)

We are saying that that's a bad idea, you know, the people who has been attracted to your game?

I can't say any better what's already been said here. I will just say I love this thread, I love the (mostly) constructive nature of the feedback, and I love that Z is taking the time to answer questions, even if I don't necessarily like all his answers.

I will just give a brief TL;DR of my views: Respecs in any form unsettle me a lot, the suit BPO idea unsettles me even more, locking weapons to roles in the progression trees is weird (why must I skill into an entire role I'm not interested in just so I can use its associated weapon?). On the other hand, I literally fist-pumped when I read there will be no more P2W Aurum gear, I raged every time I died to that.

My feelings about this system (as it seems to be with most here) lean more toward the negative than the positive overall. I'd love to see concrete examples of it in action (UI mockups, video demos, more than just what Z presented at Fanfest) as I think that would help a lot of us come to more informed conclusions (either "huh, this actually might not be that bad" or "yup, confirmed for awful"), but based on what I know I remain very skeptical.

I would echo that a system consistent with Eve will help immersion and emphasize the connection between the games. No, Dust/Legion is not Eve, but they are and should be closely linked in both concrete interaction and feel/mechanics, to keep players of both games grounded in the New Eden universe and facilitate moving from one to the other (you want Legion players' Eve subscription money, don't deny it). Many Eve players will flock to Legion if only to give it a try, and they will be comforted by a similar system that reminds them of where they are.

Why do I always write long posts late at night right before I go to bed? I really need to catch up on sleep, why am I here...

Current system is bad, we get it. That's why I suggested redoing it but better.


No one is saying that it's the same as EVE. It's only inspired by it. Poorly, I might add.


This whole chunk is mostly irrelevant. The current problems with EVE's skill system are due to it being a +10-year old patchwork quilt, not because the concept is bad. Furthermore, no one is suggesting that EVE: Legion become just like EVE except without spaceships. They are asking for an MMOFPS that is a meaningful part of the EVE universe.

In short, you could make an EVE-inspired skill system without any of these problems.

Well, at least you should be able to. Not sure why CCP ****** up so badly last time.

Well? Anything else you want to throw at me?

I just explained why it is not an excellent post, good sir.

Current system is bad, we get it. That's why I suggested redoing it but better.

I actually don't mind simple skill trees. What I do mind is when they are oversimplified or when they restrict choice.

Both of these would seem to apply to CCP Z's progression system.

To me, this is an acceptable skill tree for dropsuits.

I am reminded of a great Australian turn of phrase, 'You can't polish a turd'.

10/10 would hire as a game designer.

If it aint broke dont fix it...

Just finished drafting up a potential skill tree for dropsuits. It's very streamlined and simple.

A bit ugly, though. I'm not much of a concept artist, I'm afraid.

T1 Dropsuits require Racial Dropsuit Command I.
T2 (Specialized) Dropsuits require Racial Dropsuit Command V and Specialized Dropsuits I.

I don't see how this could even be remotely a problem to understand, given proper UI.

First off I'd like to say that often times when people find themselves pushed towards opposing sides on an issue, they tend to reflexively take defensive stances and the conversation becomes more of a pitched battle instead of a seeking towards a shared truth. (Akin to the blind men and the elephant.)
You responded to the ideas put forward, I'm very happy to see that. :) (Okay, that sounds super insulting, not meant to be.)
My goal is-and-has-been to help us figure out what's going on with the issues surrounding the Progression system. Not trying to score "right" points. :)


My post was a response to some things I was seeing people argue (either directly, or as a strong undercurrent to other arguments):
- The current progression is fine and should be left alone.
- The current progression has problems and should be fixed in the way EVE's progression has been "fixed" (certificates, ISIS, etc..)

My post was meant to show that:
1: There are intrinsic problems with the current progression.
2: EVE's progression has a mosaic of problems unto itself, thus shouldn't be considered a panacea for Dust.
3: EVE is fundamentally different from Dust, thus a fix for one won't be a fix for the other.

First off I'd like to say that often times when people find themselves pushed towards opposing sides on an issue, they tend to reflexively take defensive stances and the conversation becomes more of a pitched battle instead of a seeking towards a shared truth. (Akin to the blind men and the elephant.)
You responded to the ideas put forward, I'm very happy to see that. :) (Okay, that sounds super insulting, not meant to be.)
My goal is-and-has-been to help us figure out what's going on with the issues surrounding the Progression system. Not trying to score "right" points. :)


My post was a response to some things I was seeing people argue (either directly, or as a strong undercurrent to other arguments):
- The current progression is fine and should be left alone.
- The current progression has problems and should be fixed in the way EVE's progression has been "fixed" (certificates, ISIS, etc..)

My post was meant to show that:
1: There are intrinsic problems with the current progression.
2: EVE's progression has a mosaic of problems unto itself, thus shouldn't be considered a panacea for Dust.
3: EVE is fundamentally different from Dust, thus a fix for one won't be a fix for the other.

Goodness me no, that's almost the other extreme of Z's Idea, try this one (sorry about format)

-----------------------------/\---------------> Amarr Assault Dropsuit Operation (Further Variations as Suggested by Z)
-----------------------------/\---------------> Caldari Assault Dropsuit Operation (Further Variations as Suggested by Z)
------------Assault Dropsuit Operation ----> Gallante Assault Dropsuit Operation (Further Variations as Suggested by Z)
--------------/\---- -------\/--------------> Minmatar Assault Dropsuit Operation (Further Variations as Suggedted by Z)
Medium Dropsuit Operation
--------------\/---- -------/\----------------> Amarr Logistics Dropsuit Operation (...)
------------Logistics Dropsuit Operation----> Caldari Logistics Dropsuot Operation (...)
-----------------------------\/----------------> Minmatar Logistics Dropsuit Operation (...)
-----------------------------\/----------------> Gallante Logistics Dropsuit Operation (...)

You have to break it down a little more, so you start with suit size, the specalization, then faction, then officer gear.
Now what you do is then give weapons and modules/equipment a similar based skill tree, interseed all of them with single node skill bonuses (you can even have skill bonuses you have to choose between - Do I want +100% Max Ammo Capacity for explosive weapons or do I want +30% Dropsuit Repair rate on Repair Tools?)

In the end people build a suit which suits them perfectly, because not everyone plays the same role in the same way and we should encourage people to do as such.

Well the system is broke (1/3/5 system for the skills with no bonuses. and forced skills with no bonuses that don't unlock anything). But it is a hell of a lot better than the new one (in not just my eyes, but most eyes). So, I say amen to that.

There is an admission by some that the old system needs 're-done but better' but there is a point I think we can all agree, where there is so much to redo, its actually better to just start again. We've had the current system for over a year and numbers haven't grown.