Also, that post you've quoted was a one off from someone who didn't really contribute anything to the discussion - when us others refer to the closed beta, we are not reiterating that point. We are saying that the beta testing of all the gear was done previously and doesn't need to be done significantly more now, thus refuting the point that the OP makes by suggesting that he needs to personally test every single thing in the game.

Which was entirely tl;dr for someone with a life to live right now, maybe I'll give it a look when I have nothing better to do. You could also address the points I raised but are instead trying to be funny.

The main point I am raising is to try and find something workable in this idea, because skill respecs are something that the more casual players want and also what we should be entitled to. Like it or not, casual players will be the main source of income and publicity for this game.

And please correct me if I'm wrong but there actually is a respec in EVE, just not for skill points. You can respec your attributes (twice a year?) to get training times faster in certain areas. This could easily be applied to Dust and give all players a chance to respec in some form of time constraint that would be considerably shorter for the beta.

Edit: Not everybody was able to get into the closed beta, and the current build doesn't accurately reflect much of what happened therein. Please stop saying "you had your chance in the closed beta" - thanks.

Edit: Not everybody was able to get into the closed beta, and the current build doesn't accurately reflect much of what happened therein. Please stop saying "you had your chance in the closed beta" - thanks.

So a lengthy speech ends the discussion?

Personally I don't see this as being anywhere near as bad as people are making it out to be. Instead of discussing this and iterating on it to maybe make a small gem of an idea, we get responses like: "Heyul naw!!!"

This idea is great when considered like this as CCP will get more diverse feedback on many things

I too could write a wordy two part response outlining each and every point I was trying to make and call it won, but I instead believe that most people get the general idea and concept. That respecing has its advantages and is not a game breaker.

This was a solid discussion, did you not read Cross' posts?

The problem with the feedback, diverse as you see it, as I will iterate again, will enact scenarios that on the grandscale would occur next to zilch in the finished game. These kinds of scenarios if tested through, will generate the feedback that I've been talking about, the feedback that misleads the developers.

It's like basing a monster defense system on the one time Godzilla has the Flu, the runs, and a hangover.

We must test the beta like the finished product would be played.

"Ahahaha!"

.

Edit: As for the link provided by Cross, thanks. Although they are doing a great job of "real" testing, not all of us have the knowledge or know how to work that kind of stuff out. I personally am an artist, not a mathematician so my feedback is obviously going to be qualitative. This doesn't mean this kind of feedback is worth any less to CCP.

For the record it was not my intent to imply that mathematics/quantitative feedback was the only valid kind, nor that qualitative feedback holds no place in the sphere of beta testing. I offer my sincere apologies if I have given that impression.

Further as you mention in your post one of the best ways to aid testers/players in understanding how balanced things can be is to allow them to try out those things for themselves. While in my assessment respecs are not the correct way to go about this within D514 I do agree with and support the general concept stated.

It is my perception that a full array of militia variations (as they require no SP investment to employ) combined with a 'shooting range' (something easy to code that would let players get a feel for the effectiveness of various weapons on armor vs shields at an array of ranges) would open things up to providing players this same type of benefit without running afoul of the problems invoked by the respec method. (Even absent the shooting range, a full array of militia items would still offer these benefits albeit in a somewhat more restrictive manner)

On a closing note while I analyze points rather intently and am dogged in calling for details it is not my intent to be discourteous in my postings. I know however that sometimes I fail at conveying this and offer my apologies on this count if such has been the case here.

Cheers,
Cross

It's not your problem, just sometimes I have a hard time with so many words on my phone's screen but I thank you for clarifying nonetheless.

It also seems we have found some common ground as I think militia variations of everything is definitely the best way to go in favour of understanding different playstyles, with the only problem being the huge difference between militia and proto gear, but I can settle on this point.

With that said I still think that a simple bi-yearly respec of some skills could very much find a place in the final version of Dust, just as there is a similar respec option in EVE. To further this point only slightly, perhaps the skill you respec could be locked out for a lengthy period of time, meaning that your choices could have even bigger consequences.

Thanks again Cross for clarifying your points, much appreciated.

I'm glad we've reached a point of more common ground, and thank you for taking the time to participate in the discussion that led to it.

Regarding an EVE style "respec". The option in EVE is remap that when used goes on a 12 month cooldown timer. In essence you can remap once per year. The effects of this remap are not to alter any of the skills or SP you have currently invested but rather to provided a faster rate of gain within a selected specialized area at the cost of taking a slower rate of gain throughout the other areas available. The system would need some mechanic refitting to mesh with Dust but I see no reason the fundamental concept would not also be viable within D514. (As a side note regarding some of my prior points, if this method were slated to work within the live release the having it now during beta would trigger none of the potential problems I've mentioned in this thread).

Since rate of SP gain works differently within Dust perhaps the reworked version would discount the cost of skills within a specific sub-group allowing for more specialization while raising the cost on all skills outside of the selected group. A note worth keeping in mind, when I mention "specialization" it is more of a "weapons, armor, or equipment" question than a "Logi, Assault, or HAV" question.

My idea likely needs further refinement but would that adaptation be moving in the direction you're looking for?

Cheers,
Cross

Glad we've finally gotten this discussion to a sensible place and I feel I can throw my support behind the current direction.

But just to make absolutely clear to anyone new joining the thread - the OP idea of a weekly respec has been completely and utterly thrown out. There is no need to post any more about that suggestion. Please read Cross and Rinon's latest posts above to understand and contribute accordingly.

Thanks guys.

I'd vote "no" to any kind of respec/refund other than refund of SP used for skills that become obsolete due to changes to the game (i.e., a certain skill gets removed completely).

Reason being that you can effectively learn all the skills available, so in no way are you limited by your choices. Any type of respec would, even if only slightly, increase "FOTM" speccing.

Also, if a respec option becomes available, it won't be long before people ask for more respec options. I think CCP would be wise to stick to "your choices are final". Since, again, your choices in no way limit your future options, it is not possible to make an uncorrectable mistake.

I would agree with you if we hadn't already covered this several times. You can't have flavour of the month when the respec is yearly, do you propose a new acronym: FOTY?

Let me re-iterate that this would be a limited respec of redundant or scarcely developed skills on a yearly basis. The skill you take points away from would either give diminishing returns or add a multiplier to the group which that skill belonged to.

As for the comment about CCP yielding to "more respec options" then I have to ask on what basis did you found this claim? CCP are open to suggestions and will do what they feel is progress in the right direction. If they feel a respec option within such limited parameters is viable and a good fit for Dust then that is up to them, if not then so be it.

The ability to shape the game is in our hands, take the opportunity instead of ignoring everything we have worked out in this thread and disagreeing with it.

FOTY, yes, that would work ;) No but seriously, what I mean by this is that any option to (partially) change your skill layout will in some way promote using that option to spec into whatever seems most OP. I admit that with what you propose the impact would be tiny.

But, that combined with the fact that I simply so no reason whatsoever to allow any kind of respec option leads to my opinion on this suggestion (and more broadly on any form of respec options): I'd rather not see it happening.

However yes, obviously it's up to CCP. I was just voicing my opinion on the matter.

In EVE ONLINE there was an option to reset your SP but only like once a year or something like that. That would be a cool option but certainly not every week, where's the fun in that?
It's part of the learning curve to be able to manage your SP wisely!

And that doesn't make you think it was removed for a reason?

No reason tp help people too lazy to look up how the game works

And you wanna know what that changes into? People leaving ptw games

It isn't ptw but buying resets would make it ptw, they're suppose to be consequences for not planning ahead and this is one of them