Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mike Poole
Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State
67
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 04:22:00 -
[1] - Quote
Even if just temporarily it's desperately needed in a game as incomplete and imbalanced as this.
Slap a price tag on it, hell make it cost aurum if you want to be a **** about it. Even toss on a time limit so someone can only do it once a week or month or something so it isn't abused.
Even at this "release" stage of the game there are too many missing pieces of critical equipment and items that may be nerfed into oblivion one day or buffed out of it.
Forcing your players to either gimp themselves waiting for an addition/update that may never come or punishing those that invest just to find that next week they've wasted everything is just a **** move. There's enough grinding in this game as it is, people shouldn't be needing to grind even more to make up for trying to enjoy the game before a new addition takes a crap on all they've done so far.
Someone wants to try playing as a logi or a heavy? Well they're going to have to invest a load of sp into it just to get to a point where they are actually built like one just to find out that they're horrible at it and now get to either quit the game in rage or play a game they hate until they can dump more sp into the next specialty just to toss the dice again.
Quit dicking around and playing with these partial respecs already and just add a self respecing system. |
Stephen Rao
Verboten XXI
13
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 04:51:00 -
[2] - Quote
Nope, bad idea.
While I can get behind a respec upon graduation from the Academy, you're supposed to live with your choices. The best way to learn something is through failure.
Also while every player with 1mil SP wishes dearly that they could respec, just think of how broken the game would become if the players with 14mil could just respec into the flavour of the month whenever they wanted. Adding timers or diminishing returns isn't going to help or change that. As new things come out everyone will have an equal opportunity to skill into it, no need to respec your entire character. |
Talos Alomar
Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
832
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 04:54:00 -
[3] - Quote
A respec purchased with AUR would make the game pay to win as you would have to respec to the flavor of the month to stay effective. |
Treablo James Howard
WarRavens
2
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 04:54:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP only offered respecs due to huge changes. They have given 2 out. Which I believe is more than EVE has had in its 10 years? (correct me if wrong)
There are no bad placements for SP. Only set backs to where you want to be right now. Who knows maybe later you'll spec into that and realize you already have 3 levels of skill.
|
The Robot Devil
BetaMax. CRONOS.
323
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 05:57:00 -
[5] - Quote
Mike Poole wrote:Even if just temporarily it's desperately needed in a game as incomplete and imbalanced as this.
Slap a price tag on it, hell make it cost aurum if you want to be a **** about it. Even toss on a time limit so someone can only do it once a week or month or something so it isn't abused.
Even at this "release" stage of the game there are too many missing pieces of critical equipment and items that may be nerfed into oblivion one day or buffed out of it.
Forcing your players to either gimp themselves waiting for an addition/update that may never come or punishing those that invest just to find that next week they've wasted everything is just a **** move. There's enough grinding in this game as it is, people shouldn't be needing to grind even more to make up for trying to enjoy the game before a new addition takes a crap on all they've done so far.
Someone wants to try playing as a logi or a heavy? Well they're going to have to invest a load of sp into it just to get to a point where they are actually built like one just to find out that they're horrible at it and now get to either quit the game in rage or play a game they hate until they can dump more sp into the next specialty just to toss the dice again.
Quit dicking around and playing with these partial respecs already and just add a self respecing system.
-1 If you think the game is bad now you would hate it if we could respec anytime we wanted. |
Mike Poole
Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State
75
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 11:16:00 -
[6] - Quote
1. This isn't EVE, this may be a hard concept to grasp for some people but it's true. What works for EVE doesn't mean it's going to be a golden rule here.
2. You're always going to end up with people that horde SP and are able to take advantage of a new addition, respecs or not. They may not be able to jump head first into it but it's going to happen.
3. Why are people so afraid of flavors of the month? It's called variety, people are able to switch up the game and keep it interesting. If someone takes advantage of a flavor of the month and starts destroying other people with their build then guess what, everyone else can respec as well to take advantage of that build and take the fun out of it or find a means of counterin
Not allowing respecs in a game like this is going to lead to one thing, stagnation. With limited SP accrued over long periods people aren't going to experiment anywhere outside low sp alts and spreadsheets. Everyone works toward an optimized build without deviating, without trying out something new that could catch on and make the game more interesting.
Lose interest in the game in a no-respec system? You're screwed, you either enjoy playing as specialty X or you spend the next few months climbing back up from the bottom of the barrel or you quit.
Lose interest in the game with a respec system? Well why not try out playing a heavy this week? Or since you have more SP than when you started out how about something that you never thought you'd have the SP/funds for?
|
Cosgar's Alt
Mikramurka Shock Troop Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 11:19:00 -
[7] - Quote
Purchasable Respec = P2W
Everyone will just be respecing into the new FotM over, and over, and over again. The little nerf merry go round we're on now would be thrown into overdrive and nobody will want to play because something they like will wind up getting nerfed eventually. It won't be about who has the best gun game or fittings, it'll be about who has the biggest wallet to keep up. |
RoundEy3
Condotta Rouvenor Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 21:02:00 -
[8] - Quote
I hate to say it but I have come to believe this feature is needed for DUST. If this were EVE I'd say absolutely not, no way, never, but this is a very different game with a very different crowd.
I could talk a lot about the similarities and differences, but instead here's my basic suggestion on respec options.
First: There would be a respec limit. By that I mean 2-4 times a year or something like that.
Second: For the cost..... Simple, just make it cost like 20% of your current SP pool to respec.
That way the option is there pretty frequently, there is a penalty to doing it, so one wouldn't want to do it often, and there's no real money involved! |
Vermaak Doe
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
770
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 21:10:00 -
[9] - Quote
CCP should ONLY do this once at least skill placeholders are added. Despite everyone having an equal chance to skill into something new, the people even trying to use it would be at a major disadvantage, because of the sp invested gap, and the lack of being able to invest into something from their start. However, respecs shouldn't be available via aurum or isk since as we should all know, that promotes flavor of the month gameplay. It should only be done when CCP adds new things in my opinion. |
TcuBe3
THE STAR BORN Dark Taboo
10
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 22:07:00 -
[10] - Quote
Ok ok, not to be ignorant here but where are the resources for me that actually explain what I'm spending my sp on? I feel that until ccp does a really good job of explaining all the details of my sp purchases than respecs are needed. Not every player is gonna go read pages and pages of wiki data to research one sp purchase. I don't feel there is enough IN GAME information explaining the details of dust skills and equipment to yield no sp respecs. |
|
ECHO PACK
GamersForChrist
53
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 22:25:00 -
[11] - Quote
if they make it 20 dollars and no isk back then im down |
Chinduko
KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION
145
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 22:57:00 -
[12] - Quote
If CCP does not want to give respecs to players that enjoy trying new specializations, then give us more SP per match to skill up more specializations. This game will not last the estimated time CCP expects it to take us to completely get all skills. But, I'll add, people fail to realize that you don't have to respect to get the so called "flavor of the month" weapon. It would be nice to be able to respec out of CCP's foolishly over-nerfed weapons. |
Mike Molle
L.O.T.I.S. RISE of LEGION
19
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 23:34:00 -
[13] - Quote
No No No No No No, I'm tired of people not making a commitment "Oh, this didn't work out as well as i thought it would, i'm gonna respec" the "**** move" would be to offer a respect AT ALL, it would be a slap in the face to the vets that play this game
Oh and HTFU |
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
199
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 23:36:00 -
[14] - Quote
I'll just leave this here
Malkai Inos wrote:The skillsystem is supposed to give weight to your decisions concerning role and gear. Increasing Specialization goes along with increasing effort and time required, increasing the cost of changes the further one goes. Bearing the consequences of ones decision is a central aspect of the new eden philosophy and is a worthwhile aspect for this reason alone but not exclusively.
The skilltree differs from many other progression systems in that it is not just a strife to power but rather a strife to flexibility. Once you max all relevant skills of one progression you can choose to invest into a second one, and then another and so on. This means that while the amount of SP to be had is in practical terms unlimited (there is a set amount but i don't expect it to be reached, possibly even through the game's lifespan) there is a limit of power any given combination of suit/gear can have. That allows (relatively) new players to compete with year old veterans if they full on specialize. The vet can still use his excess SP to change his role in a whimp, giving him the deserved advantage over the newer player but the total possible gap is limited.
A system without respecs can also dramatically shift the power between new and old blood, whenever new gear is released. New situations and fits emerge that veterans first have to spec into just as new players, giving the latter the chance to compete even early on if they're smart. That gives Vets a changing enviroment where staying on top is an ongoing cognitive effort to adapt to the changes.
If CCP were to introduce respecs, both concepts would break down.
Everyone could become everything without any time effort invested, giving flexibilty as a default and rendering excess SP near worthless, thus lowering replay value and, of course profitability (boosters, anyone?). It would reduce the skillsystem to a comparatively short powergrind and nothing else. No one likes grinding (i guess).
More dramatic even is the effect that Vets with enough SP can switch to whatever is new, OP or just interesting, depriving new blood of the chance to jump into the game and compet on the new content. This leads to a "why bother" effect where players avoid the game because they could never become relevant without millions of SP and leaves the high SP chars with an unchallengeable superiority and ultimately with boredom due to lack of competition.
TL;DR: NO
|
Chinduko
KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION
145
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 23:43:00 -
[15] - Quote
Mike Molle wrote:No No No No No No, I'm tired of people not making a commitment "Oh, this didn't work out as well as i thought it would, i'm gonna respec" the "**** move" would be to offer a respect AT ALL, it would be a slap in the face to the vets that play this game
Oh and HTFU
There are a lot of vets that would prefer to be allowed to respect and they wouldn't see a respect as a slap in the face. I prefer commitment to the team in that I could respec into any role they needed for planetary conquest. That's my commitment. If a player wants to be committed to their SP allocation, so be it. And, if a player wants to be committed to their team by a respect into a role they are missing, it sounds like being a team player.
I highly doubt CCP will give respecs like that but we deserve that aren't so one-sided to only play one specialization deserve that option.. |
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
2479
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 23:54:00 -
[16] - Quote
No. |
Draco Cerberus
Purgatorium of the Damned League of Infamy
73
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 00:18:00 -
[17] - Quote
As a vet who knows that new equipment is coming down the pipeline, I am one of the many that believe optional respecs should be available. My personal preference is that as new gear is introduced or major changes to how the equipment is being "balanced" occurs that the option becomes available to do a respec.
Many people use the TAC ARs at this point in time because it allows them to be competitive with heavies, mcc snipers and the other medium suited mercs who are using the weapon and we all know that when the other rifles are introduced the TAC is going to be nerfed (as stated by ccp: range and damage). I would like to use one of the new weapons when they come out and hope that the respec option will be available again, unfortunately due to needing a weapon now, I used my SP as I saw fit and would do so again under the same situation.
If respecs were allowed once per year (like attribute changes in eve online) I believe it would be fair and would limit people from constantly changing their skills to the flavor of the month. Whether this is a paid service or not, I believe the option should be available. Personally I would rather just be able to select an option in the UI to respec character when I have a respec available rather than the need to contact customer support for this service.
In Eve the client software handles attribute adjustments, this would be the Dust equivalent. I realize this is more programming that would need to be done but I imagine that it would save devs and customer support staff a great deal of time were this feature to be offered through the game client itself rather than make it a customer support issue. Then, when a player has earned a respec, they could wait and save it until something new comes out or use it to correct a mistake they made when choosing a skill last week or a year ago.
If CCP were to make this a paid service, I believe that the cost of the respec should be no more than 5000-10000 aurum, and along with the respec, an asset liquidation should be performed. This last optional respec was costly to many players who stock up on gear. Their stockpiles of gear should have been purchased back by CCP other than the Aurum items. CCP knows that when a player has respeced into another class or racial suit that much of their old gear will now be defunct, yes you can still use the modules but the suits themselves are costly when purchased in hundred lots, especially if a person is running proto gear. It would be nice to have that isk back, but thank you CCP for the optional respec that we got.
In short, yes, optional yearly skill respec with asset buy back included. |
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
199
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 00:38:00 -
[18] - Quote
Draco Cerberus wrote:As a vet who knows that new equipment is coming down the pipeline, I am one of the many that believe optional respecs should be available. My personal preference is that as new gear is introduced or major changes to how the equipment is being "balanced" occurs that the option becomes available to do a respec.
Many people use the TAC ARs at this point in time because it allows them to be competitive with heavies, mcc snipers and the other medium suited mercs who are using the weapon and we all know that when the other rifles are introduced the TAC is going to be nerfed (as stated by ccp: range and damage). I would like to use one of the new weapons when they come out and hope that the respec option will be available again, unfortunately due to needing a weapon now, I used my SP as I saw fit and would do so again under the same situation. I see where you're coming from here and a limited respec to, for example, all the amarr heavies to switch to their preferred race might be acceptable. Anything beyond "racial symmetry" i.E. stuff that is not yet announced or whole classes that don't exist yet (e.g. pilots, commandos) should not lead to respecs. Getting into new stuff quickly to get an edge should be an important part of one's skillchoices.
Draco Cerberus wrote:As If respecs were allowed once per year (like attribute changes in eve online) I believe it would be fair and would limit people from constantly changing their skills to the flavor of the month. Whether this is a paid service or not, I believe the option should be available. Personally I would rather just be able to select an option in the UI to respec character when I have a respec available rather than the need to contact customer support for this service.
In Eve the client software handles attribute adjustments, this would be the Dust equivalent. I realize this is more programming that would need to be done but I imagine that it would save devs and customer support staff a great deal of time were this feature to be offered through the game client itself rather than make it a customer support issue. Then, when a player has earned a respec, they could wait and save it until something new comes out or use it to correct a mistake they made when choosing a skill last week or a year ago.
Excuse my insolence but i hear that comparison to attribute remaps in every thread about respecs at least once and i think it's a completely useless one.
First of all, attribute remaps are a remnant of the, since removed, bloodline attributes and serve no other function than to allow players to specialize their training into specific areas, wich would otherwise not be possible.
Secondly attribute remaps do not allow the relocation of spent SP in any way shape or form.
Lastly, remaps are limited to incentivice thinking ahead and sticking to ones training plans. Respecs do nothing of the sorts as they allow you to make a complete turn without any investment or second thought (other than AUR, maybe). Remaps are specifically designed to be as far away from respecs as possible. |
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis Covert Intervention
1032
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 00:59:00 -
[19] - Quote
See posts 2, 3, 4, 5, & 7.
There are already cries that Dust is P2W. CCP has narrowly avoided crossing the line on this and I commend them all in all for how well they've done (tho the "better than Proto" AUR gear needs a touch of the nerf bat or needs an ISK equivalent.) but allow players to buy respecs and D514 is P2W no ifs ands or buts about it.
Beyond that Dust and EVE are not "separate games" happening in isolated worlds they are both aspects of the events taking place in one domain New Eden. The link between games is rudimentary at this point sure but the roadmap calls for completely integration and that disbars the use of "your choices don't really matter you can always just undo" modes of game development.
Even if Dust and EVE weren't part of a single world the idea of respecs in Dust as a common thing (payed or otherwise) is awful because of its totally devaluing effect on the secondary market. There will be no sandbox if the economics are dismissed so cavalier a fashion. The sandbox thrives on player driven effects, on choices with meaning. When changes as fundamental as what gear (and how well) every merc can run become as mutable as whim then larger things like long term tactical planning, market trend analysis (or tend setting), out of the box innovation, et al become devalued. Why plan long term when everything can be changed within minutes? Why try to understand or care about the economics when tomorrow everyone may be running max gear of a totally different type? Why innovate when everyone else can clone everything you've done after a single match?
You know what else respecs do? They kill the longevity of the game. CCP stated out of the gate (or before the gate even opened if you're counting closed beta) that they were building Dust to take around 7.5 years to max all skills (assuming there weren't new skills added along the way... ) add limitless respecs and what used to require mufti-millions of SP involving years of game play to earn will now be reduced to a matter of months as everyone who's earned to the SP for a single proto build is now proto in everything since they can swap at will.
Put bluntly, unlimited respecs (yes even those you have to P2W for) sell the future of the game to appease a lack of patience or dedication among some players... and frankly players who aren't interested in being here for the long haul aren't going to stick around either way so shortening the lifespan of the game to hold on to their attention for a few weeks (or possibly months) more is not only poor game development but bad business as well.
0.02 ISK Cross |
Chinduko
KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION
145
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 01:57:00 -
[20] - Quote
Cross Atu wrote:See posts 2, 3, 4, 5, & 7. There are already cries that Dust is P2W. CCP has narrowly avoided crossing the line on this and I commend them all in all for how well they've done (tho the "better than Proto" AUR gear needs a touch of the nerf bat or needs an ISK equivalent.) but allow players to buy respecs and D514 is P2W no ifs ands or buts about it. Beyond that Dust and EVE are not "separate games" happening in isolated worlds they are both aspects of the events taking place in one domain New Eden. The link between games is rudimentary at this point sure but the roadmap calls for completely integration and that disbars the use of "your choices don't really matter you can always just undo" modes of game development. Even if Dust and EVE weren't part of a single world the idea of respecs in Dust as a common thing (payed or otherwise) is awful because of its totally devaluing effect on the secondary market. There will be no sandbox if the economics are dismissed so cavalier a fashion. The sandbox thrives on player driven effects, on choices with meaning. When changes as fundamental as what gear (and how well) every merc can run become as mutable as whim then larger things like long term tactical planning, market trend analysis (or tend setting), out of the box innovation, et al become devalued. Why plan long term when everything can be changed within minutes? Why try to understand or care about the economics when tomorrow everyone may be running max gear of a totally different type? Why innovate when everyone else can clone everything you've done after a single match? You know what else respecs do? They kill the longevity of the game. CCP stated out of the gate (or before the gate even opened if you're counting closed beta) that they were building Dust to take around 7.5 years to max all skills (assuming there weren't new skills added along the way... ) add limitless respecs and what used to require mufti-millions of SP involving years of game play to earn will now be reduced to a matter of months as everyone who's earned to the SP for a single proto build is now proto in everything since they can swap at will. Put bluntly, unlimited respecs (yes even those you have to P2W for) sell the future of the game to appease a lack of patience or dedication among some players... and frankly players who aren't interested in being here for the long haul aren't going to stick around either way so shortening the lifespan of the game to hold on to their attention for a few weeks (or possibly months) more is not only poor game development but bad business as well. 0.02 ISK Cross ps ~ For those who want to talk about the EVE remap remember the following. Being able to focus your future SP gain =/= altering your previously assigned SP.EDIT: Also this idea has been brought up and shot down several times already, one recent example and my first post from it Cross Atu wrote: #20 Posted: 2013.01.21 19:44 | Respec in a game about choices and consequences is simply a poor mechanic. Making it AUR only is even worse as that pushes the P2W side of things.
If this option is included choices cease to have a real implication you simply alter them as you desire. Want to solo for a day? Sure respec into it, want to go Heavy for awhile yup why not? Feel like using up all that salvage? Sure let's just respect into each specialized area to use the proto salvage until it runs out then swap to the next one. Nothing like that free proto ride. And when you run out of the pure proto from salvage? Sure just respec into support/core skills and run free fits until you have more free proto salvage.
Adding this option would ruin the player market as well as increase the "flavor of the month" build/exploits. Furthermore there needs to be a certain degree of parity between both games in New Eden, and adding respec in fails to meet this bar.
-1 to respec
0.02 ISK Cross
and a bonus Reimus Klinsman wrote: Respec is an awful idea and will result in a loss of money. If people could respec, it'd take just a few months to max out the SP you need for a build, then when you want to switch builds you just respec and you're set.
The lifetime of the game would be shortened from several years to a few months.
It will cheapen the game. Learn to live with your mistakes.
It won't be pay to win for me. It would simply be a SP reset. Define "win". I see winning as helping my corp with the role they need, even if I don't make the top of the leaderboard. |
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
2485
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 03:10:00 -
[21] - Quote
@chin
You don't care, do you?
Cross has gone through great lengths in posting that well-thought-out statement and yet you just dismiss it. All because you are just too impatient to train for everything for the next seven to ten years. You don't belong here if you think respecs (paid or otherwise) are important for you. |
RoundEy3
Condotta Rouvenor Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 14:03:00 -
[22] - Quote
As I stated in my earlier post here I am for a limited, non ISK/money based respec option.
I say this because despite a few elitists, purists, diehards, stubborn gamers, whatever you want to call them, believe that dust should function the same as eve on the timeline and skill investment level. I do not agree.
It shouldn't because it is a different game. It is a shooter. This is a FTP game at the core, and I'm of the opinion that bringing so much eve obsession. Forcing this kind of time sink and commitment on everyone will make them leave. Some of these people say GTFO to everyone that even suggest the idea! Even in eve (which I play) hearing other people's demands on what they consider "commitment" and "dedication" the the universe means very little to me. It is a game!
I am for finding a balance of options here, a respec that is limited, has a penalty, and doesn't cost real money or isk. Seriously, the number of people who are going to commit to a 5 year training plan with no leniency in a shooter is few and far between. Seriously, who cares enough to pledge their time and long term interests to the ideals of a few misguided game nuts. If anything just allowing a respec a couple times a year would let people try new stuff, which would probably keep them playing longer. |
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis Covert Intervention
1036
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 14:57:00 -
[23] - Quote
Chinduko wrote: Define "win". I see winning as helping my corp with the role they need, even if I don't make the top of the leaderboard. I also see see a respect as a way to try completely different specializations. That's not paying to win. That's paying to try something different.
"Win" in this case is match victory, this becomes more true the as you move into FW and especially PC. "Win" also contains aspects of "preform better than would otherwise be possible" as I've yet to see any P2W situation where the player literally just inputs money and is given only a victory screen or a stat update to show victory. P2W rather is granting imbalanced advantages which lead to victory and doing so on the basis of a currency external to the game world.
Additionally there are already two ways in game to try something new, either
- Make an Alt
- Earn the SP and test it out
Trying something new is great, being able to try actual battlefield fits and tactics within non-simulated matches at whim without lasting consequence (aside from gaining personal advantage) is not great it's pay to win.
In addition to all the drawbacks of respecs (most of those I list haven't been touched on by your reply) it's also completely unnecessary for what you're describing (assuming you're not going for P2W). CCP has stated they're looking at adding a "shooting range/simulator" to the game which would give an out of match method to 'try before you buy'.
It's a better solution and it's already on the roadmap (which means it'd come out faster than a theoretical respec anyway).
~Cross
ps ~ While I'm most certainly interested in hearing your own or other mercs responses to the "shooting range" aspect if you're going to continue advocating for a respec please address the other listed negative aspects presented not simply a single item from the list. |
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
209
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 15:01:00 -
[24] - Quote
RoundEy3 wrote:As I stated in my earlier post here I am for a limited, non ISK/money based respec option.
I say this because despite a few elitists, purists, diehards, stubborn gamers, whatever you want to call them, believe that dust should function the same as eve on the timeline and skill investment level. I do not agree.
It shouldn't because it is a different game. It is a shooter. This is a FTP game at the core, and I'm of the opinion that bringing so much eve obsession. Forcing this kind of time sink and commitment on everyone will make them leave. Some of these people say GTFO to everyone that even suggest the idea! Even in eve (which I play) hearing other people's demands on what they consider "commitment" and "dedication" the the universe means very little to me. It is a game!
I am for finding a balance of options here, a respec that is limited, has a penalty, and doesn't cost real money or isk. Seriously, the number of people who are going to commit to a 5 year training plan with no leniency in a shooter is few and far between. Seriously, who cares enough to pledge their time and long term interests to the ideals of a few misguided game nuts. If anything just allowing a respec a couple times a year would let people try new stuff, which would probably keep them playing longer. Your argument won't get many supporters if you devote your first paragraph to an insult of all those who disagree with you.
Eve is a different game than Dust. Ok. So? Aren't they based on the same universe? Are they not build on the same basic philosophy? Are you familiar with the term Non Sequitur?
Some say GTFO because of faulty comparisons and a general lack of sound reasoning in these discussions.
Your proposition attacks the very foundation on wich the game build upon and all the justification you have to offer is that you don't like it (you are free to do so) and that you expect others not to like it either, a statement wich is weak considering that games don't have to appeal to everyone and outright useless if not supported with proper quantification.
Cut down on the hostility and try some reasoning next time you want people to share your opinion. |
RoundEy3
Condotta Rouvenor Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 15:10:00 -
[25] - Quote
There is no hostility. It's my guess that the majority of people who share my opinion will not "kiss the ring" and do something else that isn't so time consuming as keeping an edge in new eden.
I just want to see the battle fields well populated for a long time by fps players, not just those who swear by EVE, also you kind of prove one point I was stating. Some people take these games way too seriously. "Attacked the foundation" what is this a religion? |
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis Covert Intervention
1037
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 15:24:00 -
[26] - Quote
RoundEy3 wrote:As I stated in my earlier post here I am for a limited, non ISK/money based respec option.
I say this because despite a few elitists, purists, diehards, stubborn gamers, whatever you want to call them, believe that dust should function the same as eve on the timeline and skill investment level. I do not agree.
It shouldn't because it is a different game. It is a shooter. This is a FTP game at the core, and I'm of the opinion that bringing so much eve obsession. Forcing this kind of time sink and commitment on everyone will make them leave. Some of these people say GTFO to everyone that even suggest the idea! Even in eve (which I play) hearing other people's demands on what they consider "commitment" and "dedication" the the universe means very little to me. It is a game!
I am for finding a balance of options here, a respec that is limited, has a penalty, and doesn't cost real money or isk. Seriously, the number of people who are going to commit to a 5 year training plan with no leniency in a shooter is few and far between. Seriously, who cares enough to pledge their time and long term interests to the ideals of a few misguided game nuts. If anything just allowing a respec a couple times a year would let people try new stuff, which would probably keep them playing longer.
You'll have to include CCP among those "elitists" or whatever you end up calling them after all it's CCP who said they wanted the game to take at least seven and a half years to max out in (unless you're saying that timeline isn't long enough to qualify for your definition of 'functioning like EVE' in which case I'd ask how long is long enough?).
Your assessment that at the core D514 is an FPS is inaccurate. Dust 514 is a genera deifying hybrid and at it's core it's New Eden. Dismissing the innovation and uniqueness present in that denigrates the game and is clearly not what CCP has been presenting in their blogs, press releases and FanFest vision statements/keynotes over the last more than a year.
Leaving aside your rather pervasive ad hominem editorializing and even my above notwithstanding your contentions fall short in two regards. Firstly they do not address or analyze the aspects I've raised in my prior post and simply dismissing those aspects out of hand does not change that (yes I know you didn't quote me but my post is relevant to this issue). Secondly implying that not supporting a respec is equivalent too demanding players commit to a 5 year training plant with no leniency simply isn't an accurate representation of how the game mechanics function sans respec. Most skills are useful to one degree or another regardless of chosen build, which is one example of leniency. Another aspect is that you can only use one weapon at a time (nades somewhat notwithstanding) not only that but you're not forced to completely max out a weapon just to use it, or even to be competitive with it depending on context and player gun game (for example a militia AR does more work for me right now than a Proto MD). Once a Merc has earned a full proto fit many of those skills directly cross apply to the next thus shortening the "re-train" cycle once Proto is reached. "Leniency" =/= Removing persistent meaning from player choice.
- CCP should provide sufficient and timely information on what is coming and when both changes and additions.
- CCP should continue to focus on game wide balance of weapons and gear both inter and intra gear class (be that dropsuits, light weapons, equipment, etc).
- CCP should provide a robust and through new player experience to help players entering the game have a context for making informed choices.
With those aspects in place the contention of "no leniency" frankly lacks a leg to stand on. Now let's be clear, all of those aspects are not currently complete/active within the game but then again I'm not objecting to the current respec either. Furthermore those aspects are needed regardless of respec and present a better solution than respecs for the concerns raised regarding player constraint.
I'd be interested to hear your further thoughts on the subject and/or debate the concepts with you further, however I do hope that you will consider shelving the ad hominems in future posts as they simply act as a detraction/distraction from the actual discussion taking place.
Cheers, Cross |
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
210
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 15:26:00 -
[27] - Quote
RoundEy3 wrote:There is no hostility. It's my guess that the majority of people who share my opinion will not "kiss the ring" and do something else that isn't so time consuming as keeping an edge in new eden.
I just want to see the battle fields well populated for a long time by fps players, not just those who swear by EVE, also you kind of prove one point I was stating. Some people take these games way too seriously. "Attacked the foundation" what is this a religion? I feel you, but Dust is not going to die just because part of the potential consumer base disagrees with one aspect of the game. Dust is trying to catch all those folks who like FPS but don't like the simplicity of many FPS and i believe they are legion. Ok not quite, but a game doesn't need beat COD to be successfull.
A weapons lab is on the way, new militia stuff is likely to be added, trying stuff will become easier in the future so we don't need respecs to fix this anymore.
I have explained on the first page why i think that a "no respec" policy is an important and enriching aspect of the game and why i think that allowing respecs could damage the skillsystem to a point where it's very existence is called into question.
No respecs have their own downsides an some people might leave the game because of them. Others, like me, are here partly because of this aspect and it's implications. There are people that wouldn't play COD or BF but play Dust just as there are people that don't care for WoW or Guildwars but love EVE Online. These are the ones for whom this game is made for. |
RoundEy3
Condotta Rouvenor Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 15:34:00 -
[28] - Quote
@ Cross Atu In post 8 I had a quite simple balanced proposal for adding a respec feature that would allow people to occasionally change battlefield roles. My goal here is simple, balance the requests for a respec while keeping the bonus of persistent choice.
Maybe you're lacking something to bring such a quantified and over complicated, beaurocratic, analysis system to figuring out something as plain as giving people the chance to play a game, not live by it.
You are totally missing my point, the quest for the submission to the value of persistent meaning might not mean as much to other people as it does you. When you turn on your PS3 and play some dust does it fulfill your quest for meaning of choice??? Some people who are good at the game and have put considerable time into just want to play differently every now and then. Why is that such a camplicated idea? |
RoundEy3
Condotta Rouvenor Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 15:40:00 -
[29] - Quote
Malkai Inos wrote:RoundEy3 wrote:There is no hostility. It's my guess that the majority of people who share my opinion will not "kiss the ring" and do something else that isn't so time consuming as keeping an edge in new eden.
I just want to see the battle fields well populated for a long time by fps players, not just those who swear by EVE, also you kind of prove one point I was stating. Some people take these games way too seriously. "Attacked the foundation" what is this a religion? Other than your final remark i feel you, but Dust is not going to die just because part of the potential consumer base disagrees with one aspect of the game. Dust is trying to catch all those folks who like FPS but don't like the simplicity of many FPS and i believe they are legion. Ok not quite, but a game doesn't need to beat COD to be successfull. A weapons lab is on the way, new militia stuff is likely to be added, trying stuff will become easier in the future so we don't need respecs to fix this anymore. I have explained on the first page why i think that a "no respec" policy is an important and enriching aspect of the game and why i think that allowing respecs could damage the skillsystem to a point where it's very existence is called into question. No respecs have their own downsides an some people might leave the game because of them. Others, like me, are here partly because of this aspect and it's implications. There are people that wouldn't play COD or BF but play Dust just as there are people that don't care for WoW or Guildwars but love EVE Online. These are the ones whom this game is made for.
Thank you for listening.
I can understand the adherence to eve, but it's got to be obvious that if that is the only group that picks up DUST and continues to play it there aren't going to be the large scale battles happening all over planets like people want to imagine. More likely it'll become a bunch of skirmishes between a few bad ass corps with a few pubbers here and there.
My intention here isn't all that bad... |
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
210
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 15:50:00 -
[30] - Quote
RoundEy3 wrote:@ Cross Atu In post 8 I had a quite simple balanced proposal for adding a respec feature that would allow people to occasionally change battlefield roles. My goal here is simple, balance the requests for a respec while keeping the bonus of persistent choice. A SP penalty accomplishes nothing as long as you remain to be able to max whatever branch you happen to desire. You quickly regain SP during play and Passively and anything beyond, say 8-9m is likely to be inconsequential for many possible builds and therefore losing it will not be perceived, or act as, a deterrent in any way.
Persistent choice is supposed to be the default position and should not require to be rewarded for making, with available respecs, the inferior decision.
RoundEy3 wrote: Maybe you're lacking something to bring such a quantified and over complicated, beaurocratic, analysis system to figuring out something as plain as giving people the chance to play a game, not live by it.
Even while your remark is not aimed towards me i implore you to refrain from further Ad Hominems if you desire to continue this exchange.
RoundEy3 wrote: You are totally missing my point, the quest for the submission to the value of persistent meaning might not mean as much to other people as it does you. When you turn on your PS3 and play some dust does it fulfill your quest for meaning of choice??? Some people who are good at the game and have put considerable time into just want to play differently every now and then. Why is that such a camplicated idea?
I think everyone understands very well that different people have varying views concerning an optimal approach to a game's progression philosophy.But you also have to understand that your argument, while valid, applies equally to both sides of the argument, leaving us with an argument that lacks any argumentative power for either. |
|
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
210
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 16:00:00 -
[31] - Quote
RoundEy3 wrote: Thank you for listening.
I can understand the adherence to eve, but it's got to be obvious that if that is the only group that picks up DUST and continues to play it there aren't going to be the large scale battles happening all over planets like people want to imagine. More likely it'll become a bunch of skirmishes between a few bad ass corps with a few pubbers here and there.
My intention here isn't all that bad...
I can perfectly understand you want the best for the game. What i would like you to consider is that we have a resonably strong and dedicated community despite mixed reviews wich poins to the fact that there are indeed numerous people who like the current system and it's implications.
Changing that system might alienate a large part of the current community and i doubt that those lost players will be supplanted by people who are perfectly happy with whatever product they enjoy now.
There is a distinct possibility that sacrificing part of Dust's unique features to raise the playercount might accomlish the oppsite. The fact is, we both can't know with certainty what the effect of such a change could be. It follows that this consideration cannot be used to inform the decision as it provides no usefull knowledge to do so.
|
RoundEy3
Condotta Rouvenor Gallente Federation
20
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 16:01:00 -
[32] - Quote
Malkai Inos wrote:[quote=RoundEy3]@ Cross Atu In post 8 I had a quite simple balanced proposal for adding a respec feature that would allow people to occasionally change battlefield roles. My goal here is simple, balance the requests for a respec while keeping the bonus of persistent choice. A SP penalty accomplishes nothing as long as you remain to be able to max whatever branch you happen to desire. You quickly regain SP during play and Passively and anything beyond, say 8-9m is likely to be inconsequential for many possible builds and therefore losing it will not be perceived, or act as, a deterrent in any way.quote]
Ok at least you're looking at this for what it is. The great part about the SP penalty is since it is a % obviously the less SP you have the more this would affect you. Basically a young character who switches around often will find it is difficult to advance in ability overall, but the respec would allow them to switch roles non the less. Where as a vet character with many SP will find little value to even doing it in the first place since there will be a point you will have crosstrained anyhow. Also to further balance it out we're talking a couple times a year. A YEAR
By completely removing the option who is losing out? The person who is bored, unsatisfied with their current setup, wants to take on a new squad role, or the person who says "No, that was your choice" ??? |
TcuBe3
THE STAR BORN Dark Taboo
13
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 16:11:00 -
[33] - Quote
I'm curious if most of the people who are against respecs are either.
A. EVE players who are "elitist a" and swear by a gaming culture that is almost a religion.
Or
B. Those who have 10+ million SP already and don't want to even the playing field.
Again there were ill informed players who wasted sp on skills that they have no intentions on ever using, lets not punish the uninformed just because they are not privy to the endless pages to skill data or fully comprehend the inner workings of the massive eve universe. The skill respec would keep the game fun, playable and forgiving to new players which is absolutely needed. |
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
210
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 16:30:00 -
[34] - Quote
RoundEy3 wrote: Ok at least you're looking at this for what it is. The great part about the SP penalty is since it is a % obviously the less SP you have the more this would affect you. Basically a young character who switches around often will find it is difficult to advance in ability overall, but the respec would allow them to switch roles non the less. Where as a vet character with many SP will find little value to even doing it in the first place since there will be a point you will have crosstrained anyhow. Also to further balance it out we're talking a couple times a year. A YEAR
By completely removing the option who is losing out? The person who is bored, unsatisfied with their current setup, wants to take on a new squad role, or the person who says "No, that was your choice" ???
Let me explain why i think that % penalties not only won't hurt low SP chars that much but why it is especially damaging for high SP ones.
We asume: A 10m SP B 100m SP
A can currently max out any class that requires up to 10m SP in total. After the respec that number powers to 8m. With 8m SP he can still max or almost max the majority of the available Infantry classes and even some vehicle classes. The lost 2m can be regained with a rather, but not quite dedicated playing scedule in about 2months.
Once A regained this 2m in SP he is able to respec into any class or vehicle that requires up to 8m again wich means that he can reasonably expect to respec six times a year without beeing affected by the penalty as long as he does not feel the need to have a secondary class. Note that he can also instantly adapt to newly added gear and take advantage of new emerging playstyles without significant penalty.
B on the other hand can spec into several classes simultaniously before the respec. After his first respec he will still be able to maximize multiple roles but his penalty is a much more significant 20m SP. B can not reasonably expect to regain that amount during the course of at least 6 months, rather a year if he is not willing to continously boost and cap out. This means that respeccing is a much more significant commitment for B wich makes him less likely to adapt to newly added gear. In fact B is in a distinct disadvantage against B if he is not willing to loose large amounts of SP wich disincentivices accumulating large amounts of SP on the first place.
This leads to an environment were having more SP than needed for any particular class is rendered the inferior approach to respeccing regularily. That is what i meant when i mentioned changes that call the skillsystem in question and one reason why i object to respecs.
AUR respecs are simply out of question to me because this would make the SP system a skinner box that serves only the purpose of extracting money from players that wish to compete.
ISK respecs are either affordable for both casuals and corps, making the SP system obsolete (skinner box) or only affordable for corps, widening the already distinct protostomping. |
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis Covert Intervention
1039
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 16:32:00 -
[35] - Quote
RoundEy3 wrote:@ Cross Atu In post 8 I had a quite simple balanced proposal for adding a respec feature that would allow people to occasionally change battlefield roles. My goal here is simple, balance the requests for a respec while keeping the bonus of persistent choice.
Maybe you're lacking something to bring such a quantified and over complicated, beaurocratic, analysis system to figuring out something as plain as giving people the chance to play a game, not live by it.
You are totally missing my point, the quest for the submission to the value of persistent meaning might not mean as much to other people as it does you. When you turn on your PS3 and play some dust does it fulfill your quest for meaning of choice??? Some people who are good at the game and have put considerable time into just want to play differently every now and then. Why is that such a camplicated idea?
I'll go and give post 8 a more detailed read before I respond, that only seems fair. In the same exact vein I must remind you that you have still yet to address the majority of points I have raised in this thread thus far. My posts don't speak to your motivations nor specifically indite them so while you reiterate you motives and that's fine it still serves in no way to address any of the problematic aspects which I've raised regarding respecs. If you feel your proposed plan from post 8 addresses these raised issues please do specify how and why.
I must admit I am baffled by your continued insistence on using ad hominem attacks within your posts, it honestly does a disservice to both this discussion and to your point of advocacy. I will reiterate that discontinuing their use would be of both general (to the topic) and specific (to you) value, please consider it or failing that perhaps elaborate on why you feel they are required to present your point of view?
Persistent meaning within New Eden is not a "quest" it is the standard of game play. It is an aspect which is frankly more enjoyable to many (not commenting on ratios here) and glaringly absent from most other games. Without that aspect I wouldn't play EVE or Dust because frankly they wouldn't motivate me. I possess literally hundreds of games of various types on both the PC and PS3 when I'm in the mood for something without persistent choices and a sandbox environment I play another game outside of New Eden. It's in no way a question of saying one play style is superior to another, it's simply that persistence is core and key to New Eden (aka Dust/EVE) and lacking in most other games so why would I as a player desire fewer types of play experience?
Having played this game since closed beta I can fully understand the desire to try something new or play something different, but that's already available within the game in a manner that avoids the problems respecs will cause. Even if one doesn't wish to play D514 at all until the option to open a new piece of gear is presented that is still possible in the present game state through use of passive SP. The live release of Dust isn't even 6 months old, once characters begin reaching a certain level of SP all earnings will become a doorway into diversity. With a core build in place it's not that long of a trek into trying a new weapon, piece of equipment or even dropsuit so there's literally noting stopping any player from having what you're asking for under the current mechanics, the only restriction is that they won't have it this instant. Dust is free and gives you SP for free over time, nothing in that forces yourself or any player to grind or play without diverse options, nor does it create the choice of "grind or quit". The only thing it requires is the ability to be entertained for a time (either by current builds within Dust or by activities outside of Dust be they games or offline) while practicing a bit of patience.
Just as Dust is more fun with the diversity of having more light weapons than the AR on the field so too are FPS type/hybrid games more interesting having with a game like Dust that offers the unique aspect of persistent choice. Why are you so intent in your opposition to this difference/diversity?
off to read and respond on post 8 Cross
|
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
210
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 16:38:00 -
[36] - Quote
TcuBe3 wrote:I'm curious if most of the people who are against respecs are either.
A. EVE players who are "elitist a" and swear by a gaming culture that is almost a religion.
Or
B. Those who have 10+ million SP already and don't want to even the playing field.
Who we are and what we think doesn't do anything to our arguments or Ad Hominem. Just stop if you want to be taken seriously. Again there were ill informed players who wasted sp on skills that they have no intentions on ever using, lets not punish the uninformed just because they are not privy to the endless pages to skill data or fully comprehend the inner workings of the massive eve universe. The skill respec would keep the game fun, playable and forgiving to new players which is absolutely needed.[/quote]The game punishes impulsive behavior by design. I wholehartedly support any efforts to improve the NPE and am frankly puzzled by the lack of content in this field while CCP acknowledged that improvements in NPE where a huge financial success in EVE but that is still no argument for abandoning the game's and company's development philosophy. There are other ways to make the live of newberries more pleasant.
|
TcuBe3
THE STAR BORN Dark Taboo
14
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 16:40:00 -
[37] - Quote
@cross
So are you for or against a respec option?
Also curious how much sp you are rolling with since you have been around since closed beta. |
Chinduko
KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION
150
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 16:42:00 -
[38] - Quote
Maken Tosch wrote:@chin
You don't care, do you?
Cross has gone through great lengths in posting that well-thought-out statement and yet you just dismiss it. All because you are just too impatient to train for everything for the next seven to ten years. You don't belong here if you think respecs (paid or otherwise) are important for you.
Is this a joke or not? Of course I'm not waiting for 7-10 years to try everything. Dust won't last that long. Why wouldn't a person belong in Dust if they are so intrigued with the Dust gear that they'd want to try everything? That seems like a person that does belong.
FYI, plenty of people have come across with excellent well thought posts on boths sides and I've read them all and am still convinced that I want respecs. I'm not afraid of players "paying to win" which I disagree will even happen. Players that are winning now will continue to win with or without respecs, regardless of your or any other person's fear.
I will never tell a person they cannot respec into a new role simply because you're afraid of something you don't even know will happen. If respecs are enough to break the game, then it was already broken in the first place, in which case it won't matter. |
TcuBe3
THE STAR BORN Dark Taboo
14
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 16:49:00 -
[39] - Quote
Malkai,
I actually agree with you, I'm not trying to change your culture, religion or whatever Internet cult you follow. I would just like to see Greater access to in game references regarding each individual skill treed and the consequences of making a impulsive decision on DUST. My argument is that not every player is informed if the unforgiving nature of this game. |
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis Covert Intervention
1040
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 16:52:00 -
[40] - Quote
RoundEy3 wrote:I hate to say it but I have come to believe this feature is needed for DUST. If this were EVE I'd say absolutely not, no way, never, but this is a very different game with a very different crowd. CCP has stated many times that these are not to separate sovereign entities but both different ways to access the same persistent sandbox that is New Eden. Even their (and Sonys) advertising of Dust 514 trumpets this fact. Are they trying to appeal to another segment of the gaming population? Sure. But Dust is specifically not supposed to be like anything else that's been offered so far.
Quote: I could talk a lot about the similarities and differences, but instead here's my basic suggestion on respec options.
I'd be interested to see what you have to say about those similarities and differences, especially in light of the above.
Quote: First: There would be a respec limit. By that I mean 2-4 times a year or something like that.
How did you arrive at this ballpark and why does this, in your perception, suit the situation best? Also how does this interact with things like market concerns et al as raised in my other posts?
Quote: Second: For the cost..... Simple, just make it cost like 20% of your current SP pool to respec.
That way the option is there pretty frequently, there is a penalty to doing it, so one wouldn't want to do it often, and there's no real money involved!
While I support the move towards not making a P2W respec (good show in coming up with a mechanism which addresses that) I'm not seeing how a % cost respec would circumvent the larger issues that respecs create within a sandbox (see the examples listed in my other post).
Regardless of the % value assigned all you're doing is shortening the life span of the game. Both because of the issues cited in my other post and because this mechanic gives an extra advantage to Vets, and advantage which will only grow as the game progresses. For a new player that % loss cuts making it a mechanically painful choice to respec, for a Vet it's just a numbers game, Cost to proto one build + additional % value = Always running the most broken combo. Granted I'm certain some players would use it for other purposes but that doesn't mitigate the impact of all those who can and will (under this proposal) do just as I've described.
In short it lets Vets who already possess more ISK, game experience, corp/alliance connections etc. have a new mechanic which further disadvantages the newer players. Presently a new player can skill into a full proto build and be on the same level gear wise, a savvy new player can look at the macro state of the game and select a role which capitalizes on the weaknesses of the prevailing trends, thus giving them an asset with which to counter things such as Vet map knowledge, gear knowledge, squad train time etc. It lets new players select a role of value to their Corp and develop player skills which compliment it allowing them to be a legitimate asset to their Corp even without the SP totals of a Vet. Respec removes all of that placing an even greater emphasis on raw SP totals and rendering the game on balance less friendly to new players.
If the concern you're raising really is about Vets being able to play with more diverse gear in a somewhat compressed time frame, and if all the other solutions/aspects presented thus far (including things like the simulator/firing range) don't provide an adequate outlet in your view then a better solution is to add a function more akin to the EVE remap which allows faster training in a very narrow aspect with the ability to alter that specialized focus once per year. This would still allow long time players to get a bit more diversity faster without running afoul of the manifold issues respecs engender.
0.02 ISK Cross
|
|
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
210
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 16:53:00 -
[41] - Quote
TcuBe3 wrote:Malkai,
I actually agree with you, I'm not trying to change your culture, religion or whatever Internet cult you follow. I would just like to see Greater access to in game references regarding each individual skill treed and the consequences of making a impulsive decision on DUST. My argument is that not every player is informed if the unforgiving nature of this game. So then we are in complete agreement concerning the underlying premises and differ only in our personal opninions about what to make out of them. Sadly, this is where it gets serious.
I would like to stress again that i find the currently available amount and quality of ingame information, be it informative and concise skill descriptions or thorough and accurate attribute descriptions of various items wholly inadequate. This, i believe leads to uneducated decisions regarding skills and gear and is the main reason for the issues that respecs are supposed to solve.I predict that if the NPE get's it's due improvements, there will be a far lower number of need for any kind of respec mechanic.
A possible solution that i find both compatible with my vision of New Eden and of great efficacy is a short but steep increase in passive SP gain for new players. Something like a 2x multiplier for caracters below 1.5m SP wich then gradually lowers until 2m where passive sp gain reaches the normal value.
This lessens the negative consequences of faulty skillchoices, provides quicker perceived improvement for new players and, most importantly, stays true to the concept of skillchoices beeing permanent. The values are of course arbitrary so there's room for discussion about how long and significant this boost ought to be. |
TcuBe3
THE STAR BORN Dark Taboo
14
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 16:59:00 -
[42] - Quote
Malkai Inos wrote:TcuBe3 wrote:Malkai,
I actually agree with you, I'm not trying to change your culture, religion or whatever Internet cult you follow. I would just like to see Greater access to in game references regarding each individual skill treed and the consequences of making a impulsive decision on DUST. My argument is that not every player is informed if the unforgiving nature of this game. So then we are in complete agreement concerning the underlying premises and differ only in our personal opninions about what to make out of them. Sadly, this is where it gets serious.
My bottom line.
Ultimately, I think there should be greater in game information to the EVE universe and the skill tree. I think a 1 time respec per PSN ID should be available on a strictly case by case basis. |
Daedric Lothar
Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION
602
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 17:02:00 -
[43] - Quote
Lol, make it part of the Elite pack. $99.00 for 1 respec.
There. Respec all you want. |
RoundEy3
Condotta Rouvenor Gallente Federation
20
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 17:07:00 -
[44] - Quote
Daedric Lothar wrote:Lol, make it part of the Elite pack. $99.00 for 1 respec.
There. Respec all you want.
Maybe this whole time 514 has been a projected # in CCP inner circles as to how much the average fanatic will pay over 5 years |
Chinduko
KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION
150
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 17:08:00 -
[45] - Quote
Cross Atu wrote:Chinduko wrote: Define "win". I see winning as helping my corp with the role they need, even if I don't make the top of the leaderboard. I also see see a respect as a way to try completely different specializations. That's not paying to win. That's paying to try something different.
"Win" in this case is match victory, this becomes more true the as you move into FW and especially PC. "Win" also contains aspects of "preform better than would otherwise be possible" as I've yet to see any P2W situation where the player literally just inputs money and is given only a victory screen or a stat update to show victory. P2W rather is granting imbalanced advantages which lead to victory and doing so on the basis of a currency external to the game world. Additionally there are already two ways in game to try something new, either
- Make an Alt
- Earn the SP and test it out
Trying something new is great, being able to try actual battlefield fits and tactics within non-simulated matches at whim without lasting consequence (aside from gaining personal advantage) is not great it's pay to win. from the list.
I disagree with your notion of "pay to win" because players will respec for different reasons. I will respec to try new things which is not "pay to win" it's pay to have fun by trying different things. As for "perform better than would otherwise be possible" if an option is in the game such as a nice weapon or suit, then it is already beyond being impossible, therefore, respec or not, anyone can use it.
You're idea of winning is winning PC and FW mainly. I'm assuming you're referring to weapons such as the TAC AR giving an advantage over other weapons in to help the winning. More so, for most players to use the TAC, they wouldn't have had to respec as they would have likely already have SP in ARs to use it already. But OP weapons or suits of any kind are not the players' fault. That was CCP's fault, and I don't want to have to pay the price of no respecs because CCP is incompetent in balancing weapons. If anything is OP, it's CCP's fault for doing so.
Furthermore, long time beta players already know what the most powerful loadouts are so it's not likely they'd have to respec since they're already winning. If any presumptions about P2W were actually correct, it would more likely be to help those players not using the loadouts the long time players already know work. If anything, it would be "Pay to compete" but that's presumptuous as well. |
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis Covert Intervention
1041
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 17:12:00 -
[46] - Quote
TcuBe3 wrote:@cross
So are you for or against a respec option?
Also curious how much sp you are rolling with since you have been around since closed beta.
I'm against the mechanics of repeated/unlimited respecs (even with a "cooldown"). It's a bad fix to what is (in the case of many who desire them) a fairly legitimate motivation.
There are various things in play here and there's no way a single post (not matter how wall of text it became) could touch on all of them. Here's one example however, CCP has a 10 year plan for Dust and fully intends to continue ongoing development beyond that. This has been stated plainly and repeatedly, they are invested for the long term. Most gamers are not accustomed to this development method nor do they really believe it's possible/will happen, the post by Chinduko serves as one example of this. In response to a disbelief in the fundamental intent of the developers a, unsurprising, reaction takes place. That being the drive to alter all aspects of the game who's value or balance is predicated upon that long term roadmap.
If Dust were your standard off the shelf, minimum support cycle AAA title then I'd be resoundingly in support of a New Game+ and/or respec option because in that micro cycle environment it makes sense. But that is a short term single player centric method of viewing the game and D514 is neither meant to be single player focused nor short term. [Side note: I'm not opposed to either short term or single player games, but that's not what Dust is] To treat Dust as if it's a short term "one and then done" type game (assuming it gains any traction with the Devs) only results in making it more and more that type of game. Not only does that put it in more direct competition with many established franchises (a bad business choice) but it also directly contradicts all current and prior promotion, promise, and advertising from CCP or Sony regarding Dust (which would be a poor PR, business, and development choice).
There were plenty of who didn't believe EVE would use this type of development method and with how uncommon it is that's not surprising. It's also not surprising that many think the same thing of Dust for the same sort of reasons. I personally like the diversity of a differing game/development type and as such don't want Dust to become more like the short term titles which already exist. If I want those I'll play them outside of Dust (indeed I do play many of them) when I want something which does things differently I'll play Dust (which I've done quite a bit of for many months now even with full character wipes... which brings me to your next question ).
Counting only the actual SP on my character now (i.e. ignoring all the SP that was lost over closed beta due to the standard wipe after each build) I'm rolling with 14 mill SP, or as I like to call it "enough to proto fit an assault build but not a support logi.
Cheers, Cross
EDIT: Post number 41 from Malkai Inos is spot on. |
TcuBe3
THE STAR BORN Dark Taboo
14
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 17:21:00 -
[47] - Quote
Malkai Inos wrote:TcuBe3 wrote:Malkai,
I actually agree with you, I'm not trying to change your culture, religion or whatever Internet cult you follow. I would just like to see Greater access to in game references regarding each individual skill treed and the consequences of making a impulsive decision on DUST. My argument is that not every player is informed if the unforgiving nature of this game. So then we are in complete agreement concerning the underlying premises and differ only in our personal opninions about what to make out of them. Sadly, this is where it gets serious. I would like to stress again that i find the currently available amount and quality of ingame information, be it informative and concise skill descriptions or thorough and accurate attribute descriptions of various items wholly inadequate. This, i believe leads to uneducated decisions regarding skills and gear and is the main reason for the issues that respecs are supposed to solve.I predict that if the NPE get's it's due improvements, there will be a far lower need for any kind of respec mechanic. A possible solution that i find both compatible with my vision of New Eden and of great efficacy is a short but steep increase in passive SP gain for new players. Something like a 2x multiplier for caracters below 1.5m SP wich then gradually lowers until 2m where passive sp gain reaches the normal value. This lessens the negative consequences of faulty skillchoices, provides quicker perceived improvement for new players and, most importantly, stays true to the concept of skillchoices beeing permanent. The values are of course arbitrary so there's room for discussion about how long and significant this boost ought to be.
I think you should also then look at the weekly player sp cap thread as your input would be greatly appreciated. In order for this game to truly succeed I believe that resources need to be available to newer players. Those resources obvioulsy in the form of an award system to keep up a motivation of playing for newer and experienced players and also a significant level of resources to inform users on skill tree decisions and their consequences. Thank you for clarifying. |
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis Covert Intervention
1041
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 17:35:00 -
[48] - Quote
Chinduko wrote:Cross Atu wrote:Chinduko wrote: Define "win". I see winning as helping my corp with the role they need, even if I don't make the top of the leaderboard. I also see see a respect as a way to try completely different specializations. That's not paying to win. That's paying to try something different.
"Win" in this case is match victory, this becomes more true the as you move into FW and especially PC. "Win" also contains aspects of "preform better than would otherwise be possible" as I've yet to see any P2W situation where the player literally just inputs money and is given only a victory screen or a stat update to show victory. P2W rather is granting imbalanced advantages which lead to victory and doing so on the basis of a currency external to the game world. Additionally there are already two ways in game to try something new, either
- Make an Alt
- Earn the SP and test it out
Trying something new is great, being able to try actual battlefield fits and tactics within non-simulated matches at whim without lasting consequence (aside from gaining personal advantage) is not great it's pay to win. from the list. I disagree with your notion of "pay to win" because players will respec for different reasons. I will respec to try new things which is not "pay to win" it's pay to have fun by trying different things. As for "perform better than would otherwise be possible" if an option is in the game such as a nice weapon or suit, then it is already beyond being impossible, therefore, respec or not, anyone can use it. You're idea of winning is winning PC and FW mainly. I'm assuming you're referring to weapons such as the TAC AR giving an advantage over other weapons in to help the winning. More so, for most players to use the TAC, they wouldn't have had to respec as they would have likely already have SP in ARs to use it already. But OP weapons or suits of any kind are not the players' fault. That was CCP's fault, and I don't want to have to pay the price of no respecs because CCP is incompetent in balancing weapons. If anything is OP, it's CCP's fault for doing so. Furthermore, long time beta players already know what the most powerful loadouts are so it's not likely they'd have to respec since they're already winning. If any presumptions about P2W were actually correct, it would more likely be to help those players not using the loadouts the long time players already know work. If anything, it would be "Pay to compete" but that's presumptuous as well.
While I understand what you're saying with your dissension to my definition I believe you are overlooking all of the players who very much will use it exactly that way. And while yes I agree that an overpowered piece of gear, or gear combo is broken regardless of respec it's impact on the game is inextricably tied to the pervasiveness of its ubiquitousness of it's use. You personally, or even the players who would employ said mechanics in the manner you present, not necessarily contributing to that problem does not prevent or remove the problem from the game.
As far as performing better than possible is concerned your reasoning is flawed because if you could already use all that gear with the all the passive buffs under current game conditions then you wouldn't care if respecs were in the game or not, it's because of the options/advantages that Mercs are limited/restricted from using that respecs are even being brought up in the first place, if there was no limit there would be no conversation.
Irrespective of all of that P2W (while an issue) is not the only or the central tenet of why respecs are a bad mechanic and while I"m sure we could continue to debate the definition of P2W at a certain point doing so without addressing the whole spectrum of flaws with respecs becomes an off-topic distraction rather than a continuation of the discussion.
I would be interested to hear your responses to all the other aspects that have been listed as flaws to a respec system, personal definitions of P2W notwithstanding.
Cheers, Cross |
Chinduko
KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION
150
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 18:03:00 -
[49] - Quote
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
2489
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 19:29:00 -
[50] - Quote
Chinduko wrote: Is this a joke or not? Of course I'm not waiting for 7-10 years to try everything. Dust won't last that long.
I stopped reading your post right here. You definitely don't belong here. I suggest you leave Dust. |
|
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis Covert Intervention
1043
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 20:07:00 -
[51] - Quote
@Chinduko
Your post #49 begins with, and seems largely predicated upon the presumption that all declarations and promises from CCP regarding meaningful continuing development are irrelevant. Playing through closed beta to present I can attest that there is no single build or thing which has always been the apex. Right now yes the TAR is over reaching it's role and most Mercs who've been around a bit know that. Associating that with the respec discussion however is assuming that this situation will never change and experience with both Dust and EVE tells me that is a false presumption.
The rest of the contention you're presenting seems to boil down to "since aspects of the game are imbalanced respecs are required". Adding a new mechanic which causes manifold problems of it's own is not the proper solution to an imbalance within the game, fixing the TAR (in this case) however is. In fact fixes to these balance issues will be more or less required regardless of respec, as I already pointed out it's not a question of whether or not something is broken alone but also how pervasive the use of that combo/mechanic/weapon etc is and respec absolutely opens the door to an increased saturation of players using broken mechanics. That's not good for the game no matter which way you slice it.
In closing I'll reiterate that you have not directly addressed most of the factors I bring up in my post #19 nor the additional aspect I pointed out regarding the "shooting range/simulator" addition. You further make no comment nor accounting for a change in the information available to new players regarding the game which I and several others in this thread have bluntly stated needs to be improved regardless of the respec conversation.
I'd be especially keen to know how you propose to counter the destruction of game longevity that your suggestion precipitates, except that you've already made clear you don't believe the game will last and seemingly don't care for it too (if I'm in error here please do present your plan for maintaining the 10 year road map that CCP has currently established). And while we're on the subject of time since you're claiming current mechanics require "unreasonable" amounts of time to try everything in game please provide a ballpark as to what you consider the absolute maximum time that could be "reasonably" required to try out everything in the game (keeping in mind that such a figure is directly tied to the overall shelf life of the game).
~Cross |
low genius
The Sound Of Freedom Renegade Alliance
104
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 21:59:00 -
[52] - Quote
TcuBe3 wrote:Ok ok, not to be ignorant here but where are the resources for me that actually explain what I'm spending my sp on? I feel that until ccp does a really good job of explaining all the details of my sp purchases than respecs are needed. Not every player is gonna go read pages and pages of wiki data to research one sp purchase. I don't feel there is enough IN GAME information explaining the details of dust skills and equipment to yield no sp respecs.
read. |
Chinduko
KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION
151
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 22:05:00 -
[53] - Quote
The AR has been and is the most powerful weapon, and especially after the Uprising with weapon nerfs to weapons that were actually able to compete with the AR such as the laser, mass driver, and HMG. Most people will notice that the AR is and was the most commonly used Weapon, now more than ever since it's competition was nerfed. The medium suits with high shields or overly high dmg mods which are also well known were the powerhouse of earlier builds but more so in Uprising due to the increased high and low power slots. This is no secret to the experienced Dust players. The medium suits have more than enough high and low power slots for this. This is no secret. This is your winning build. If you haven't noticed that, then pay closer attention to PC and informed or skilled players. New and uninformed players are not likely to know this information and that make them more likely to waste SP in underpowered loadouts which will decrease their satisfaction with Dust.
If you're afraid of "pay to win" then with non aurum or ISK respecs, there speculation about respecs causing "pay to win" are ended. Now everyone has the same opportunity to use anything they please which is fine with me.
I see no problems that a respec creates for the game when everyone is allowed to use them. The problems you speculate a respec will cause, I disagree that they are problems. They are speculation.
If the low playerbase that Dust has is not evidence enough for showing it likely will not make it 10 years, you are blind. Attrition will set in and players will gradually lose interest. This happens to every FPS on the market, except Dust already has the player base of a game past its prime.
There is only one factor I am concerned with and it is the only factor that may actually play out. It is "pay to win" This effects every player but it is still only speculation that it will actually occur. But, take away the charge and no more "pay to win" I would have wanted to charge aurum simply to keep CCP with enough money to keep updating the game. Now we are all in the same position. You can either respec or not. It's your choice and noone else's.
If imbalanced weapons are not an issue because they will be fixed then I'm sure you won't mind others having respecs to play different roles since those imbalances will be balanced. The game will always be saturated with the suit sand weapons that are OP, you cannot stop that with or without a respec. This is why the "flavor of the month" or "pay to win" concepts are of no concern to me.
The way for CCP to even hope to build the player base by bringing in new players it to remove the proto pub stomping and find a way to balance the game for new and experienced players. New players are not likely to play if they cannot compete. I further would expect that many experienced players would also enjoy non proto pub stomping games. CCP will not likely solve this as it undermines their entire SP system. The game is innovative but seems designed to fail. Unfortunately, I believe all we'll have left in two to three years are merely a handful of large corporations and non corporate players. It may end up like MAG but with a shorter life. MAG started out with perhaps 20 to 30 thousand players and is now down to mere hundreds. I don't know that Dust ever reached much above 10 thousand players and it was just released.
|
Chinduko
KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION
152
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 22:10:00 -
[54] - Quote
Maken Tosch wrote:Chinduko wrote: Is this a joke or not? Of course I'm not waiting for 7-10 years to try everything. Dust won't last that long.
I stopped reading your post right here. You definitely don't belong here. I suggest you leave Dust.
Eventually those remaining in Dust will leave. Whether you read my post or not is of no effect to that. If you think a game with an average of 6000 players and a max so far around only 10,000 players at release will last a decade, damn, you are extremely optimistic. |
Green Living
PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies
334
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 22:12:00 -
[55] - Quote
If they are going to continue to change items and their effectiveness, then yes allow purchasable respecs. |
Encharrion
L.O.T.I.S. RISE of LEGION
107
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 23:19:00 -
[56] - Quote
Firstly, I do not believe that respecs are in any way necessary or even good for this game. I believe that adding respecs would infact harm this game for the reasons specified above by Cross Atu and others. However, I am open to the possibility that there may be a way to implement respecs in a way that is in fact beneficial to the game.
A post by RoundEy3 on the first page brought up an interesting idea for respecs that unfortunately suffered from some of the same problems and introduced some of its own. However, I noticed that with specific numbers for SP cost as well as additional often suggested limitations on respecs, some interesting math appears.
The limitations would consist of: 1. Any SP from unspecced skills would be cut in half. That is, if a skill is unspecced, the amount of SP unallocated to spend on other things is equal to the amount of SP lost. This is important, as you will see later. 2. Respecs would be limited to a certain amount of SP, such that the spendable amount would be fairly limited in scope. You would select skills to unspec, and SP from those skills would be unallocated according to limitation 1. You would only be able to unspec SP up to the SP limit, and no higher. 3. Limitation 2 is meaningless if the respec can be repeated instantly, as you could simply respec over and over until you had respecced ALL your SP. If limitation 2 is to be of any use at all, there must be a time limit on how often you can respec. The precise time period is not entirely important, but I believe once every 3 months is probably too often, and once a year is possibly a little long, so lets just use that range for this arrangement (although one time only is a possible arrangement as well).
So why is cutting reallocated SP in half important? Let's say it takes 5 days to make approximately 1.5 million SP (I haven't played in a while so I am pulling this number out of my ass, I apologize if its particularly inaccurate). Our respec option allows the unallocation of 3 million SP. Half this SP is lost, and half can be allocated to other skills. Half of 3 million is 1.5 million, so it will take 5 days to make back the losses incurred by the respec. However, the amount of SP reallocated is also 1.5 million SP, so in the same 5 days in which we make back our losses, had we not respecced, we would have gained the skills we just respecced into, and not sacrificed other skills for it. This respec arrangement is kind of like sacrificing SP to frontload your skill training (although this analogy pretty much fails since you can spend the SP that you gain making up for the respec loss on new skills). It would have its uses, but other than those uses it would generally be better to earn the SP rather than respec it into place.
You still have to live with the consequences of poor SP allocation, since should you respec bad skill choices, you still lose out on a full half of the SP you spent on those skills in the first place.
I'm pretty sure this system avoids the "Flavor of the Month" problem as well. Sure, they could sacrifice some other skills they feel they don't really need to get the current OP weapon. Then when the FotM changes, they respec out of the old weapon and into the new one. Except they have to sacrifice MORE than just the previous FotM weapon, they have to sacrifice some of the SP they earned in the intervening time. This subset of players will know the game well enough to not make stupid mistakes with their skills, so any skills they sacrifice will have to be retrained. This makes any respec extremely inefficient; given the numbers above, if they sacrificed the previous FotM and another skill for 3 mil SP to skill a new weapon with 1.5 mil SP, and then proceeded to spend half of the next five days retraining the skill they sacrificed (because if they didn't want the skill they wouldn't have trained it in the first place) then they have basically gotten almost nowhere at all. They were already halfway through the time required to earn the skills for the new weapon without sacrificing the previous one. In fact, if a player wanted to capitalize on the next FotM, the most efficient thing to do would be to simply collect SP before hand and pool it until the next OP thing comes around to skill it up all at once; this is something that anyone can already do right now.(not to mention the fact that the respec is time limited, and that time period is potentially longer than FotM phases)
It would also benefit more casual players, for whom 1.5 mil SP might not take 5 days, but two weeks. This allows them to get new skills or weapons earlier in a costly frontloaded kind of way.
Just to be clear here: I'm not saying this will work. I just think that it has enough potential to be examined more closely.
Also if you took the time to read this wall of text, I really appreciate it and I apologize for how lengthy it got. Thank you! |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
627
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 00:22:00 -
[57] - Quote
To the OP I say no. |
Mike Poole
Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State
92
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 00:30:00 -
[58] - Quote
Green Living wrote:If they are going to continue to change items and their effectiveness, then yes allow purchasable respecs.
That would be the rational thing to do.
Instead they're just going to continue radically tweaking things every other week and it's our fault for not being mind readers.
Just wait for the rest of the heavy/light armors to come out and anyone that didn't intentionally gimp themselves by only using basic suits and invested in the available skills gets to eat their loss because there are no more respecs.
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
2492
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 00:35:00 -
[59] - Quote
Chinduko wrote:Maken Tosch wrote:Chinduko wrote: Is this a joke or not? Of course I'm not waiting for 7-10 years to try everything. Dust won't last that long.
I stopped reading your post right here. You definitely don't belong here. I suggest you leave Dust. Eventually those remaining in Dust will leave. Whether you read my post or not is of no effect to that. If you think a game with an average of 6000 players and a max so far around only 10,000 players at release will last a decade, damn, you are extremely optimistic.
Yeah, I'm extremely optimistic especially after Eve Online first started with only 10,000 players back in 2003.
You're talking to a hardened Eve Online player here. |
Schalac 17
Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State
201
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 00:44:00 -
[60] - Quote
We are supposed to be these immortal clones that are programmed to kill for the highest bidder. So why would they not sell blank clones that allow us to remake ourselves as a better killer, for a price of course. Because DUST is only about ISK.
I say yes to AUR based respecs. |
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
2496
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 00:55:00 -
[61] - Quote
Green Living wrote:If they are going to continue to change items and their effectiveness, then yes allow purchasable respecs.
Then how come Eve Online players have only seen one respec during the past ten years of Eve's development? When I first started playing Eve, the following things didn't exist:
1. Tech 3 Strategic Cruisers like the proteus, loki, legion, and tengu. 2. Tier 3 Battlecruisers like the Tornado, naga, oracle, and talos. 3. Micro jump drives. 4. Sovereignty system with Territorial Claim Units and infrastructure hubs. 5. Planetary Colonies controlled directly by Eve players. No, not the sort you see in Dust right now. 6. Player-Owned Customs Offices (POCOs) which you see situated over planets. 7. Wormholes which introduced a whole new set of ships. See #1.
When Eve Online first started, there were no:
1. Ships bigger than a Battleship. 2. Almost no specialized mining ship. You often seen players mine in Rohks. 3. Industrial Command Ships (Orca). 4. Capital Industrial Ships (Rorqual). 5. Capital ships in general let alone a supercapital.
Etc.
Many of these things required skill books like the new ships, micro jump drives, planetary colonies, etc. And yet during the 10 years in which Eve Online operated only one respec was given not long after commercial release.
IMPORTANT NOTE:
For years many Eve Online players wanted exactly what you asked for and sometimes would make a big stink about it asking why CCP doesn't take this profitable opportunity. CCP didn't want it because it has severe ramifications towards the economy which is a very delicate beast to care for. Keep in mind this economy took the Eve players 10 years to help nurture. The other reason is that it went against the core principle or rules of New Eden which is basically saying "in order to have meaning in New Eden, you need to have consequences". If you are not willing to accept those consequences, then this is not the game for you.
Dust may be a different game and a different genre altogether, but the traditional concepts of first person shooters like the respec are not applicable to New Eden because Dust is operating in the same server and therefore the same universe and rules that Eve players strictly follow. Trying to change such rules now just for the sake of either profit or having a little extra fun is like trying to mess with the natural order. It won't be pretty. And I was there when things went ugly back in 2011 when CCP was caught red handed trying to be too greedy and ultimately the players in Eve Online revolted causing the company to lay off over a hundred employees and forced a delay in the development of Dust 514. |
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis Covert Intervention
1044
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 02:24:00 -
[62] - Quote
@Chinduko
I reiterate my invitation to you, respond to the points raised in my post #19, I'll further make this prospect easier in that you've already focused a great deal of time on the semi-sidebar of defining P2W. You need not address any aspect of the P2W question in your response to post #19. We can certainly continue that other conversation if you wish but prior to that I will await your response (with possible reminders thrown in every so often if it seems you are continuing to post in this thread/on this issue without heading my invitation).
For the sake of clarity feel free to either label or quote directly the specific points/aspect you are addressing with each response so as to make sure none of them are missed. I shall continue to await your response.
Cheers, Cross |
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
2506
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 15:13:00 -
[63] - Quote
One more thing I forgot to mention in post #61.
During the past ten years, Eve Online has seen constant adjustment to already-existing content. Here are some examples that I can remember off the top of my head.
Ship stats such as fitting arrangements, PG/CPU availability, speed, etc. Production changes regarding player-owned structures. Periodic rebalancing of the skill tree with one or two major major overhauls.
Please note that this is not the complete list of changes. You can see the changes directly in the link below:
http://community.eveonline.com/news/patch-notes/patch-notes-for-retribution-1.2
Just select a previous expansion and you will see the COMPLETE list of changes made to anything in Eve. Sorry, I can't make a TL;DR for this. |
Protected Void
One-Armed Bandits Unclaimed.
16
|
Posted - 2013.06.02 12:03:00 -
[64] - Quote
I currently have 6.4 million SP on my main character. Which means I probably won't be getting fully specced into the scout role I want, even after my optional respec goes through. There are several things I'd like to try in the future. It'll probably take me a while to get the SP for it. I'm still against purchasable respecs.
What I'd support wholeheartedly, though, is one, two or at the most three respecs for each characters, throughout the character's entire lifetime. This would allow the correction of early mistakes done while not quite familiar with the skill tree, and allow for a role change or two. But it would not be something you would do on a whim, as long as it was made very clear that you had a finite number of respecs available. |
Akaruiwrx
Deadly Blue Dots RISE of LEGION
15
|
Posted - 2013.06.02 13:23:00 -
[65] - Quote
wow this has been one headed debated and I'm really not sure which side I fall on. I haven't read some of this post I skimmed over a lot of it so forgive me if this has already been suggested. I personally am against the respec option. However I think I would be ok with re-spec's IF it costed an obscene amount of ISK AND SP was reduced by 75% after respec.
IE if you had say 8mil SP a respec might cost you 80Mil ISK and you'd start out with only 2MIL SP after the re-spec.
This would give the people who wan't it a respec while placing an appropriate penalty for doing so.
|
Rynoceros
One-Armed Bandits Unclaimed.
90
|
Posted - 2013.06.02 13:52:00 -
[66] - Quote
10,000,000 ISK Available once every 720 hours No skillbook refunding
|
VLIGHT5
The Judas Coalition
239
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 11:01:00 -
[67] - Quote
waah waah no respecs allowed players should be miserable and not allowed to have choice and variation waaaah |
Tectonious Falcon
The Southern Legion RISE of LEGION
512
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 13:23:00 -
[68] - Quote
Why can't people understand..... There is no such thing as a wrong choice. You will keep earning sp forever. You can't run out of sp which will prevent you from speccing into anything different ever again. Sure, you might set yourself back a few months, even a year, but you can still recover from that. Respecs are not needed. Especially not AUR respecs, that's just ridiculous and people should stop suggesting it. |
VLIGHT5
The Judas Coalition
239
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 15:59:00 -
[69] - Quote
Tectonious Falcon wrote:Why can't people understand..... There is no such thing as a wrong choice. You will keep earning sp forever. You can't run out of sp which will prevent you from speccing into anything different ever again. Sure, you might set yourself back a few months, even a year, but you can still recover from that. Respecs are not needed. Especially not AUR respecs, that's just ridiculous and people should stop suggesting it.
waah why do players want to play how they want NOW they should have to wait months waah waah waaaaaaaaaah |
Buster Friently
Rosen Association
630
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 16:22:00 -
[70] - Quote
VLIGHT5 wrote:Tectonious Falcon wrote:Why can't people understand..... There is no such thing as a wrong choice. You will keep earning sp forever. You can't run out of sp which will prevent you from speccing into anything different ever again. Sure, you might set yourself back a few months, even a year, but you can still recover from that. Respecs are not needed. Especially not AUR respecs, that's just ridiculous and people should stop suggesting it. waah why do players want to play how they want NOW they should have to wait months waah waah waaaaaaaaaah
Because they're entitled bitches who don't understand the nature of this game, or of the concept of effort and consequences.
Dust is about risk vs reward. If you could respec all the time, no matter the cost, the risk vs reward aspect of the strategic game would be severely watered down.
Respecs on any common availability are a bad idea. |
|
Charlotte O'Dell
Molon Labe. League of Infamy
397
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 19:55:00 -
[71] - Quote
I support this idea. |
Stephen Rao
Verboten XXI
24
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 22:30:00 -
[72] - Quote
I support a once-per-PSN respec, and it should only be available when you graduate the Newb Academy.
Once a player realizes that they shouldn't have put all that SP in Corp skills ect, I feel that they should get the opportunity to change their SP choices. It will be a one-time offer, and it will allow for mistakes to be adjusted after a player gets used to the SP tree, the game mechanics, and has a feel for what they want to spec into. It will not allow the players to choose when it will be used as I envision that upon graduating they will be presented with the option, that will be valid until they play their first non-academy game.
Anything other than this is would be bad for the game. |
Rachoi
HavoK Core RISE of LEGION
82
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 23:22:00 -
[73] - Quote
Cross's early post says it all in a rather firm nut shell. its far too long to quote effectively, but its all true none the less.
live with your choices, dont decide 'oh, i have to undo this' just because something happened to kick you around. its a cheap gameplay mechanic, and not worth it, since a respec does lead to Flavor of the Month abuse, and that would absolutely destroy the game |
Mike Poole
Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State
101
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 00:38:00 -
[74] - Quote
Rachoi wrote:Cross's early post says it all in a rather firm nut shell. its far too long to quote effectively, but its all true none the less.
live with your choices, dont decide 'oh, i have to undo this' just because something happened to kick you around. its a cheap gameplay mechanic, and not worth it, since a respec does lead to Flavor of the Month abuse, and that would absolutely destroy the game
Yea... because what totally won't destroy the game is having people invest weeks or months into developing a particular weapon or dropsuit or anything else just to find out that after a quick patch and zero warning it's now a worthless piece of crap.
I can totally see loads of players eager to throw away all that time spent and start all over without knowing what will arbitrarily get the hatchet next. |
Thurak1
Psygod9 RISE of LEGION
5
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 00:39:00 -
[75] - Quote
Once CCP comes up with a balanced game i will agree that re-specing is wrong. Till then re-spec is just fine with all the changes they keep making to weapons and armor and such. |
Rachoi
HavoK Core RISE of LEGION
82
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 00:41:00 -
[76] - Quote
Mike Poole wrote:Rachoi wrote:Cross's early post says it all in a rather firm nut shell. its far too long to quote effectively, but its all true none the less.
live with your choices, dont decide 'oh, i have to undo this' just because something happened to kick you around. its a cheap gameplay mechanic, and not worth it, since a respec does lead to Flavor of the Month abuse, and that would absolutely destroy the game Yea... because what totally won't destroy the game is having people invest weeks or months into developing a particular weapon or dropsuit or anything else just to find out that after a quick patch and zero warning it's now a worthless piece of crap. I can totally see loads of players eager to throw away all that time spent and start all over without knowing what will arbitrarily get the hatchet next.
oh stop with the whining already. you want to cheapen the game, just so you can go with whatever is most OP at the time with how you are lobbying for this useless, cheap game mechanic. i would rather hear good things [if there are any with these useless respec ideas] that this could do, because yes, they are tweaking lots of things, but then agin, how will you know if you're getting a good or bad tweak if you just change into something else> |
Mike Poole
Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State
101
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 00:42:00 -
[77] - Quote
Buster Friently wrote:
waah why do players want to play how they want NOW they should have to wait months waah waah waaaaaaaaaah
Because they're entitled bitches who don't understand the nature of this game, or of the concept of effort and consequences.
Dust is about risk vs reward. If you could respec all the time, no matter the cost, the risk vs reward aspect of the strategic game would be severely watered down.
Respecs on any common availability are a bad idea.[/quote]
I'd have to wager that those entitled bitches are under the insane idea that the purpose of the game is to enjoy themselves.
You for instance may find that investing weeks or months into a game just to find out that the core mechanics you've enjoyed have been arbitrarily changed rendering your entire setup worthless but others would tend to see that as a slight bit of an inconvenience.
|
Jason Pearson
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
1594
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 00:45:00 -
[78] - Quote
Awful suggestion. Burn it. |
Mike Poole
Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State
101
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 00:47:00 -
[79] - Quote
Rachoi wrote: oh stop with the whining already. you want to cheapen the game, just so you can go with whatever is most OP at the time with how you are lobbying for this useless, cheap game mechanic. i would rather hear good things [if there are any with these useless respec ideas] that this could do, because yes, they are tweaking lots of things, but then agin, how will you know if you're getting a good or bad tweak if you just change into something else>
Good things respecs could do?
How about providing longevity to the game without requiring the torture of the players?
Without respecs and because of how this game is designed you're forced to specialize into one role if you don't want to get your *** handed to you over and over again. So what happens when you get tired of that role or a core mechanic of your role gets nerfed destroying your play style?
Without respecs you're forced to reinvest weeks and months into starting over from scratch investing in a new line of dropsuits and weapons and modules to outfit yourself in a manner that you can actually enjoy again. How many people do you think are going to just say "**** that" and quit when they're told all the work they put into their initial setup is now a pile of fetid ****?
Respecs allow people to experiment, to try something new, to grow bored with the game and have a multitude of new setups available to try out and enjoy all over again.
|
Drex Vizla
Lazarus Squadron
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 00:52:00 -
[80] - Quote
Stephen Rao wrote:Nope, bad idea.
While I can get behind a respec upon graduation from the Academy, you're supposed to live with your choices. The best way to learn something is through failure.
Also while every player with 1mil SP wishes dearly that they could respec, just think of how broken the game would become if the players with 14mil could just respec into the flavour of the month whenever they wanted.
Its a game, i recreated my character a few times, (now i've got it) and i've been here since closed beta...... THE RELEASE OF THE BETA CODES AT PSH, respec would be very helpfull.
Side note: Add 1 more equipment slot for Assault. |
|
Rachoi
HavoK Core RISE of LEGION
82
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 00:53:00 -
[81] - Quote
Mike Poole wrote:Rachoi wrote: oh stop with the whining already. you want to cheapen the game, just so you can go with whatever is most OP at the time with how you are lobbying for this useless, cheap game mechanic. i would rather hear good things [if there are any with these useless respec ideas] that this could do, because yes, they are tweaking lots of things, but then agin, how will you know if you're getting a good or bad tweak if you just change into something else>
Good things respecs could do? How about providing longevity to the game without requiring the torture of the players? Without respecs and because of how this game is designed you're forced to specialize into one role if you don't want to get your *** handed to you over and over again. So what happens when you get tired of that role or a core mechanic of your role gets nerfed destroying your play style? Without respecs you're forced to reinvest weeks and months into starting over from scratch investing in a new line of dropsuits and weapons and modules to outfit yourself in a manner that you can actually enjoy again. How many people do you think are going to just say "**** that" and quit when they're told all the work they put into their initial setup is now a pile of fetid ****? Respecs allow people to experiment, to try something new, to grow bored with the game and have a multitude of new setups available to try out and enjoy all over again.
what you claim as longevity is nothing more than a quick skirting issue.
you say it avoids being trapped in a specialization if it gets nerfed, that is not the only thing it does.
Cross said it perfectly, it cheapens the game, because once you have a single specialization set, you can just respec and move thsoe points with any Flavor of the month crap, and the idea of 'making permanent choices' is wiped from the board. and actual things called CONSEQUENCES no longer apply. it also does destroy market values, because you can just putz around with respecs to use whatever salvage you get. that does not improve the game's lifespan, and it sure as hell doesnt sound like fun to me. there is a rather large 'NO' strapped to this idea right out the gate, and most of the playerbase gets the whole idea of 'live with your **** ups' well enough.
If you dislike the idea of no respecs... go back to CoD or whatever game you play |
Mike Poole
Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State
103
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 01:02:00 -
[82] - Quote
What the hell exactly is wrong with a "flavor of the month" exactly?
It means people are trying new things, finding new advantages to particular setups, experiencing them and then experimenting to find something new next month or next week for people to experience.
What do we have now? People so afraid of misplacing a single SP they use their spreadsheets and planners to micromanage every module down to the last SP so they can copy the exact setups described in forums to optimize their gameplay to match every single other person using that setup.
It's the same thing except where "flavors of the month" develop and move on quickly a respecless system sits around and stagnates because people can't experiment outside low sp alts and stick to their same setups for even longer until ccp releases something obviously improved for everyone to slowly move on to. |
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
244
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 01:07:00 -
[83] - Quote
I'm trying to make this particulary easy for you.
Mike Poole wrote: Good things respecs could do?
How about providing longevity to the game without requiring the torture of the players?
Fourth and fith paragraph. Please explain why his disagreement is unjustified.
Mike Poole wrote: Without respecs and because of how this game is designed you're forced to specialize into one role if you don't want to get your *** handed to you over and over again. So what happens when you get tired of that role or a core mechanic of your role gets nerfed destroying your play style?
Without respecs you're forced to reinvest weeks and months into starting over from scratch investing in a new line of dropsuits and weapons and modules to outfit yourself in a manner that you can actually enjoy again. How many people do you think are going to just say "**** that" and quit when they're told all the work they put into their initial setup is now a pile of fetid ****?
Respecs allow people to experiment, to try something new, to grow bored with the game and have a multitude of new setups available to try out and enjoy all over again.
Whole post from third paragraph on. Please explain why Cross Atu and myself are wrong to enjoy and value the very concept wich you criticize so vehemently.
You have yet to adress any of the explained disadvantages of respecs (i am particulary looking at post #14 and there are others but i am sure you will get to it eventually.
|
Rachoi
HavoK Core RISE of LEGION
82
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 01:11:00 -
[84] - Quote
Flavor of The Moth builds... where do i begin?
they are nothing but fleeting FADS, and do not stand up to the real tests that people should see in a long time persistant game. there is a point where shifting about is fine, but a total wipe and rebuild on even a bi-monthly basis would lead to making your build, getting tired of the build, and whining for another respec. and it turns into a painful cycle untill you've tried enough things and then walk away. games that have done that have in many ways, just up and died because of a mass loss in player base.
also, if you rely on those that respec all the time, they will always either cry OP or UP, because they spec into someting, whine about how bad it is, then whine that the choice they made before was killing them so effectively it does get nerfed. we need to keep solid numbers and figures in this game.
thsoe spreadsheets are courtesy of EVE players that did not want to have to worry about a respec, so they came up with something that works reletively well here in DUST, so that way you can actually plan ahead and reduce the likelyhood of mistakes. it adds to some of the longevity, and what people might think of doing after they have added enough to what they've chosen.
this is going to be a LONG TERM game, hopefully long as EVE got to recently, and running a game for so long will take alot of tweaks, shifts and fixes. you are probably one of many that make mistakes in the game, and think that to have fun you actually need the best things. hell, i made mistakes too, but i chose to live with them, because i knew i could fix what i was lacking in. i see why others want Respecs, but i honestly cannot support it.
Long term thinking, its what CCP is doing, its what alot of the good players are doing, i'm afraid you need to think that as well, and work at it. but have fun with what you've got, that way you know what you can and cant do effectively as you go. |
Mike Poole
Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State
104
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 01:24:00 -
[85] - Quote
How many people do you really believe are going to be playing this game for 7.5 years? This isn't an mmo where you have a varied and rich game where people can lose themselves in various aspects and enjoy themselves over long periods.
Dust is not an mmo, it's not the new EVE where people will spend years and years and years playing it. Dust is an FPS, it's complexity boils down to shooting stuff. If suddenly you're nerfed to hell and your ability to shoot stuff suddenly screeches to a halt you don't have many alternatives to fall back on outside starting over from scratch with a new setup. There's no "well I can always fall back on X" or "well I still enjoy the Y aspect of the game" or "well I'll just have fun with Z until they fix this"
Even then an artificial longevity propagated purely by arbitrarily selected point value goals is not a true longevity. If someone really enjoys a game they don't play it for a year because that's how long it takes to unlock their next skill, they do it because over that year they enjoyed it enough to come back over and over again.
|
Mike Poole
Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State
104
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 01:40:00 -
[86] - Quote
Rachoi wrote:Flavor of The Moth builds... where do i begin?
they are nothing but fleeting FADS, and do not stand up to the real tests that people should see in a long time persistant game. there is a point where shifting about is fine, but a total wipe and rebuild on even a bi-monthly basis would lead to making your build, getting tired of the build, and whining for another respec. and it turns into a painful cycle untill you've tried enough things and then walk away. games that have done that have in many ways, just up and died because of a mass loss in player base.
So flavor of the month fads don't stand up to the long term experimentation the stagnant builds we have no do?
How much varied experimentation is there actually going on outside of spreadsheets when it takes weeks and months to work up just a few skills just to find out that the combination you were going for is a total failure?
Few people actually experiment and experience varied game play on their own, everything is dependent on waiting for someone else with time/sp to spare to do all the work and then provide their particular experience on which everyone blindly bases their own and then moves on.
If you're retaining your player base purely by the fact that it takes years to accomplish anything is that superior to having people play for years because they actually enjoy the game? Do you believe that all of the people that might play the game and become bored of it will be the kind of people that sit around for weeks building up SP just to buy a single high tier skill? |
Jason Pearson
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
1597
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 01:57:00 -
[87] - Quote
Again, burn it to the ground. |
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
244
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 02:15:00 -
[88] - Quote
Mike Poole wrote: How many people do you really believe are going to be playing this game for 7.5 years? This isn't an mmo where you have a varied and rich game where people can lose themselves in various aspects and enjoy themselves over long periods.
Dust is not an mmo, it's not the new EVE where people will spend years and years and years playing it. Dust is an FPS, it's complexity boils down to shooting stuff. If suddenly you're nerfed to hell and your ability to shoot stuff suddenly screeches to a halt you don't have many alternatives to fall back on outside starting over from scratch with a new setup. There's no "well I can always fall back on X" or "well I still enjoy the Y aspect of the game" or "well I'll just have fun with Z until they fix this"
Even then an artificial longevity propagated purely by arbitrarily selected point value goals is not a true longevity. If someone really enjoys a game they don't play it for a year because that's how long it takes to unlock their next skill, they do it because over that year they enjoyed it enough to come back over and over again.
What difference does it make how many people i believe to be going to play this game for 7.5 years. I know that they're there. Granted i don't have numbers. Do you have any? If no, why bringing up this point if it's not going to support either side of the argument?
Why can dust not be the new EVE in regards of people playing it for years to come? Some of us already have played for a year without any sign of wear. Also Dust is inarguably more complex than other FPSs on the market right now, with new content and depth beeing build as we speak. With the amount of metagaming, the soon to be player driven market and the level of customization, we have a game of the depth that puts even some MMOs to shame.
You keep bringing up nerfs into your arguments yet i fail to understand how that necessarily relates to the subject. When something is imbalanced it's a balancing issue first and foremost. A statement that communicaction and quality concerning balance changes have to improve by a wide margin is one that would adress your concern more selectively and efficiently. On top of that it would be a statement on wich i would agree with you. Calling for respecs to fix a seperate issue is merely curing the symptoms of a disease that should be adressed directly instead.
The last part i agree with. Artificial longetivity is neither an elegant nor effective way of prolonging player retention if it's the only measure to ensure it. You correctly state that true longetivity comes from genuine enjoyment of the game. Thus we could conclude that the current lack of motivation is rooted more in the lacking quality of the central experience than in one aspect that, by your definition, is not a central part of what a FPS is about.
Isn't the solution to this problem the ongoing improvement of the core game mechanics that CCP has declared as high priority, so that players can enjoy their gameplay experience, be it with respecs or lack thereof? In isolation your concerns are understandable. Yet i disagree with your proposed solution to this concerns both for the reasons i and others have explained (i linked my post in my last reply and we can reiterate on that if needed) and for the fact that those concerns can and should be adressed directly, not through a significant change in an otherwise unrelated game mechanic.
I appreciate your reply although i hope we can reiterate on the other points that have been raised during the course of this discussion soon. |
Stephen Rao
Verboten XXI
24
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 02:31:00 -
[89] - Quote
Mike Poole wrote:How many people do you really believe are going to be playing this game for 7.5 years? This isn't an mmo where you have a varied and rich game where people can lose themselves in various aspects and enjoy themselves over long periods. You do know that this game is, and never will be finished... right?
They're adding PvE aspects, new roles, suits, scenarios, game modes, weapons, vehicles... the list goes on and on.
The fact that you don't believe that a Free to Play game, with that much continuous support comming down the pipe, can last that long... well I think you don't really know what this game is. Sure it's not EVE, but it's not like any FPS you know and have seen. It's easy to jump to conclusions now, but this is a game that will grow and get better with age. If you don't have the patience for that, purchasable respecs will get you out of this game faster, as you'll blow your load and quit.
Mike Poole wrote:So flavor of the month fads don't stand up to the long term experimentation the stagnant builds we have no do? CCP has a tendency to balance their games, and not just throw their hands up in the air and say "F it!". If it's OP today, you can bet that it will be brought into line. Your gun won't become useless, it will be balanced. TAC AR's are getting attention as we speak, if you think they weren't a problem, or that they've been nerfed so hard that you want to spec out of AR Operations all together, you are kidding yourself. |
Mike Poole
Kirkinen Risk Control Caldari State
105
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 02:39:00 -
[90] - Quote
Stephen Rao wrote: CCP has a tendency to balance their games, and not just throw their hands up in the air and say "F it!". If it's OP today, you can bet that it will be brought into line. Your gun won't become useless, it will be balanced. TAC AR's are getting attention as we speak, if you think they weren't a problem, or that they've been nerfed so hard that you want to spec out of AR Operations all together, you are kidding yourself.
Balance that doesn't make a weapon useless? So the Mass Driver and Laser Rifle are really great weapons that can still stand up against all of the AR spam and never had their unique qualities smashed to pieces because a vocal minority got pissy they weren't dominating every range any more? |
|
XXfootnoteXX
DUST University Ivy League
329
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 03:21:00 -
[91] - Quote
Everyone talks about people who would abuse it to spec into the flavor of the month.
This is the truth. Easiest fix to this would to be have a balanced game. Which I imagine CCP is working on.
Granted, if the game is actually balanced, there would be less of a reason for people to constantly respec. |
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis Covert Intervention
1078
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 06:36:00 -
[92] - Quote
Stephen Rao wrote:I support a once-per-PSN respec, and it should only be available when you graduate the Newb Academy.
Once a player realizes that they shouldn't have put all that SP in Corp skills ect, I feel that they should get the opportunity to change their SP choices. It will be a one-time offer, and it will allow for mistakes to be adjusted after a player gets used to the SP tree, the game mechanics, and has a feel for what they want to spec into. It will not allow the players to choose when it will be used as I envision that upon graduating they will be presented with the option, that will be valid until they play their first non-academy game.
Anything other than this is would be bad for the game. As anyone reading this thread knows I am against respecs and have quite a host of reasons for being so. Having said that I want to say that I could still support the above proposal as it avoids the lions share of problems created by unlimited respecs and it prevents "caching" of respecs on high SP characters (which could lead to many of the previously mentioned problems on another scale).
Combining the above proposal of a single respec per PSN idea offered on a "yes/no" basis after graduation from the Academy with an adaptation of the EVE style 'remap' (which allows players to gain discounted training costs in a specilized area at the cost of higher SP requirements within others) on a once yearly cool down (that is one year between uses, specific dates of "new years" having no effect on the timer) would provide players with options for dealing with the concerns raised in this thread presented as motives for a respec (excluding those motives such as a lack of patience and/or believe that the game will succeed, neither of which should be catered to by development).
Thanks Stephen for putting forward this idea so succinctly. Cross |
St Evilsbitch
HavoK Core RISE of LEGION
59
|
Posted - 2013.06.12 20:48:00 -
[93] - Quote
Rachoi wrote:Flavor of The Moth builds... where do i begin?
they are nothing but fleeting FADS, and do not stand up to the real tests that people should see in a long time persistant game. there is a point where shifting about is fine, but a total wipe and rebuild on even a bi-monthly basis would lead to making your build, getting tired of the build, and whining for another respec. and it turns into a painful cycle untill you've tried enough things and then walk away. games that have done that have in many ways, just up and died because of a mass loss in player base.
also, if you rely on those that respec all the time, they will always either cry OP or UP, because they spec into someting, whine about how bad it is, then whine that the choice they made before was killing them so effectively it does get nerfed. we need to keep solid numbers and figures in this game.
thsoe spreadsheets are courtesy of EVE players that did not want to have to worry about a respec, so they came up with something that works reletively well here in DUST, so that way you can actually plan ahead and reduce the likelyhood of mistakes. it adds to some of the longevity, and what people might think of doing after they have added enough to what they've chosen.
this is going to be a LONG TERM game, hopefully long as EVE got to recently, and running a game for so long will take alot of tweaks, shifts and fixes. you are probably one of many that make mistakes in the game, and think that to have fun you actually need the best things. hell, i made mistakes too, but i chose to live with them, because i knew i could fix what i was lacking in. i see why others want Respecs, but i honestly cannot support it.
Long term thinking, its what CCP is doing, its what alot of the good players are doing, i'm afraid you need to think that as well, and work at it. but have fun with what you've got, that way you know what you can and cant do effectively as you go.
It is not the PLAYERS fault CCP over nerfs/ fixes working game mechanics.You say these players are making mistakes, you are wrong. CCP has ninja nerfed several things I skilled into. How does this make it "MY MISTAKE"? You make an assumption of player error, so your core argument falls apart. My shotgun apparently does less damage since I used skill points on it. My scan profile went from -25% to -10% overnight. My scout suit actual runs slower then advertised. My armor ( and for all I know my shield) resistance skills get a stacking penalty?
As far as I can tell you are on the wrong side of this argument. A respec hurts no one, and would be a powerful tool for a new player just learning this game. If you don't like repecs don't use them, but don't **** on everyone's enjoyment because you are a miserable person so everyone else should be too.
To the other posters below this post from Rachoi I agree with most of what you are saying. 1. we should not have to wait for months to get better descriptions, and when we finally get them we should get the option to re-allocate those skill points. 2. As far as ninja nerfing is concerned, you are wrong, I feel betrayed and slighted. (not talking about any tac nerf) 3. We agree new players deserve a free respec. |
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
2678
|
Posted - 2013.06.12 23:49:00 -
[94] - Quote
No more respecs after those petitions filed before the 31st of last month according to CCP. |
Universal Decimator
Interstellar Legionnaires
3
|
Posted - 2013.06.17 10:33:00 -
[95] - Quote
A purchasable respect is a GREAT idea
First of all it would take a lot of work off of CCP's hands in the future, as they come out with new stuff and change things. CCP won't have worry about giving respects to people who complain, and we know there's a lot of those people.
Secondly it would make CCP some more money, in witch they greatly deserve. It's not pay to win but the game does take a little bit of investment and devotion from its more serious players. This helps to make the game more exciting for us grown ups. If you can't handle it, you should have played something else.
The booster chip should be called the skill regression, or something. It would very slowly give you the ability to remove skills already learnt and respend the points else ware. It should cost aurum, so people would be inclined not to misuse it.
|
Draco Cerberus
Purgatorium of the Damned League of Infamy
119
|
Posted - 2013.06.17 13:25:00 -
[96] - Quote
RoundEy3 wrote:I hate to say it but I have come to believe this feature is needed for DUST. If this were EVE I'd say absolutely not, no way, never, but this is a very different game with a very different crowd.
I could talk a lot about the similarities and differences, but instead here's my basic suggestion on respec options.
First: There would be a respec limit. By that I mean 2-4 times a year or something like that.
Second: For the cost..... Simple, just make it cost like 20% of your current SP pool to respec.
That way the option is there pretty frequently, there is a penalty to doing it, so one wouldn't want to do it often, and there's no real money involved! The infamous post #8 leaves alot to be desired. First, 2-4 respecs a year are way too many, choices must have meaning.
Second, this would make sense but having the option to respec the first time there was already a hidden cost that wasn't readily clear, CCP left us with all the stuff that we had speced into and were using before the respec. This, rather than helping us by converting the assets back to isk like was previously done has placed a large number of assets in my possession that I would rather not have. Removing SP from the character would be a penalty that would remove altogether the usefullness of a respec.
Third, there are things in life that you just can't change. Eve is a simulated future, with Dust being part of that simulated future, many of the rules that are already in place are things that carry over in Dust. We do not have the option to respec in Eve, I don't believe anymore (after the optional respec) that we should be given the option. The only reason that people want the respec is to make the game constantly mutable, like COD or BF4 and I am very happy to say that it is not either one of those games.
I work hard for my SP, I spend time playing so I can get the LV 5 whatever, to make that task easier to achieve by allowing a constant stream of respecs would devalue that LV5 skill. Already we've had the proto stomping complaints, are you absoloutely certain you want the complaints about proto this and proto that every time CCP adds a new item to the market? I know I don't, it would ruin the enjoyment I have every time I take the field and see my WP payouts blip my screen from well chosen skills. This is what Choice has Meaning is all about, rewards to those who choose well, not to the ones who decide they can play 20% longer each week to get the SP back after finding a new flavor to try. |
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis Covert Intervention
1176
|
Posted - 2013.06.18 05:16:00 -
[97] - Quote
To those still supporting the OP and general respecs please read and respond to in detail my posts #19 & #92. There's a lot of ground to cover and the issues presented within those two posts (as well as other posts not by me) really do require an address before any such idea should be considered for adoption into the game.
Cheers, Cross |
hackerzilla
Defenders of the Helghast Dream
12
|
Posted - 2013.06.18 05:33:00 -
[98] - Quote
Mike Poole wrote:Even if just temporarily it's desperately needed in a game as incomplete and imbalanced as this.
Slap a price tag on it, hell make it cost aurum if you want to be a **** about it. Even toss on a time limit so someone can only do it once a week or month or something so it isn't abused.
Even at this "release" stage of the game there are too many missing pieces of critical equipment and items that may be nerfed into oblivion one day or buffed out of it.
Forcing your players to either gimp themselves waiting for an addition/update that may never come or punishing those that invest just to find that next week they've wasted everything is just a **** move. There's enough grinding in this game as it is, people shouldn't be needing to grind even more to make up for trying to enjoy the game before a new addition takes a crap on all they've done so far.
Someone wants to try playing as a logi or a heavy? Well they're going to have to invest a load of sp into it just to get to a point where they are actually built like one just to find out that they're horrible at it and now get to either quit the game in rage or play a game they hate until they can dump more sp into the next specialty just to toss the dice again.
Quit dicking around and playing with these partial respecs already and just add a self respecing system. Honestly, people are replying to this post saying it's "dishonorable" or "not new eden". Bullshit. If DUST 514 is going to compete with other games, it needs replayablity. Since people keep demanding new items added to the game, why not have a different solution to hold off the needy customers... respecs. So many games have them, and I know people say: "New Eden isn't for COD noobs" or something along the lines that Dust isn't easy. Yeah even with respecs your going to have people it proto suits and another 20 mil SP holding them up. Honestly thats never going to change. Maybe adding a feature to the game that will make people want to play after reaching their weekly cap, is a good thing to the game as a whole, and maybe it will hurt the "vets" a little because "noobs" will have a standing chance. Honestly people grow up and stop complaining about a damn game mechanic ... |
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis Covert Intervention
1176
|
Posted - 2013.06.18 05:41:00 -
[99] - Quote
hackerzilla wrote:Mike Poole wrote:Even if just temporarily it's desperately needed in a game as incomplete and imbalanced as this.
Slap a price tag on it, hell make it cost aurum if you want to be a **** about it. Even toss on a time limit so someone can only do it once a week or month or something so it isn't abused.
Even at this "release" stage of the game there are too many missing pieces of critical equipment and items that may be nerfed into oblivion one day or buffed out of it.
Forcing your players to either gimp themselves waiting for an addition/update that may never come or punishing those that invest just to find that next week they've wasted everything is just a **** move. There's enough grinding in this game as it is, people shouldn't be needing to grind even more to make up for trying to enjoy the game before a new addition takes a crap on all they've done so far.
Someone wants to try playing as a logi or a heavy? Well they're going to have to invest a load of sp into it just to get to a point where they are actually built like one just to find out that they're horrible at it and now get to either quit the game in rage or play a game they hate until they can dump more sp into the next specialty just to toss the dice again.
Quit dicking around and playing with these partial respecs already and just add a self respecing system. Honestly, people are replying to this post saying it's "dishonorable" or "not new eden". Bullshit. If DUST 514 is going to compete with other games, it needs replayablity. Since people keep demanding new items added to the game, why not have a different solution to hold off the needy customers... respecs. So many games have them, and I know people say: "New Eden isn't for COD noobs" or something along the lines that Dust isn't easy. Yeah even with respecs your going to have people it proto suits and another 20 mil SP holding them up. Honestly thats never going to change. Maybe adding a feature to the game that will make people want to play after reaching their weekly cap, is a good thing to the game as a whole, and maybe it will hurt the "vets" a little because "noobs" will have a standing chance. Honestly people grow up and stop complaining about a damn game mechanic ...
Please see my posts #19 & #92 and respond to them in detail. There are reasons why the mechanic is a bad fix for the concerns raised, if you have a solution to those problems then by all mean respond in detail to those posts with your solution. Failing that the problems still stand.
0.02 ISK Cross |
mollerz
Minja Scouts
434
|
Posted - 2013.06.18 05:50:00 -
[100] - Quote
TL;DR the entire thread.. but lololoo who the **** would pay for a respec?
This idea is dead in the water.
You have to offer value for other's money.
even if a fool is soon departed from it, the tap cuts off quick. so quick bankruptcy starts to rear it's ugly head. many huge dev outfits have fallen from grace by being stupid. |
|
Stands Alone
Ultramarine Corp
27
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 16:21:00 -
[101] - Quote
How about a partial respec? every 6 months, you get to reset 25% of your SP. they would have to add a menu where you can choose the skills that you want to back out of however, up to 25% of course |
Malkai Inos
Opus Arcana Orion Empire
447
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 16:31:00 -
[102] - Quote
Stands Alone wrote:How about a partial respec? every 6 months, you get to reset 25% of your SP. they would have to add a menu where you can choose the skills that you want to back out of however, up to 25% of course Depending on the amount of SP you have accumululated, 25% can mean easily enough to completely switch one class. Remember that every skill caps out at V and any suit/role has only a limited amount of relevant skills so having for example 50m would respec 12.5m wich is easily enough to near max out most if not all infantry classes.
That means that this limitation gets meaningless for veteran players while remaining prohibitive for new players. If there's one thing this game doesn't need then it's a feature that's the most usefull for vets instead of newberries. |
Revelations 514
Red Star. EoN.
72
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 17:20:00 -
[103] - Quote
I say no respecs ever. You defeat the risk of actually speccing into something by giving out a respec. You will have a ton more "flavor of the month" people who spec into whatever is exploitable at the time. The only way respecs would work is if you had achieved "perfect balance" which is a myth in a constantly changing environment (aka any MMO).
Im a scout, and while a respec would benefit me greatly as I would be able to choose a logi AR/Flaylock/LAV build that would crush all, I would prefer to be forced to stick to my choices so that they actually matter. Not to mention I don't really feel like dealing with a game full of Logi/AR/Flaylock/LAV wielding/driving mofo's. |
low genius
The Sound Of Freedom Renegade Alliance
112
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 17:30:00 -
[104] - Quote
TcuBe3 wrote:Ok ok, not to be ignorant here but where are the resources for me that actually explain what I'm spending my sp on? I feel that until ccp does a really good job of explaining all the details of my sp purchases than respecs are needed. Not every player is gonna go read pages and pages of wiki data to research one sp purchase. I don't feel there is enough IN GAME information explaining the details of dust skills and equipment to yield no sp respecs.
this is a game where you're supposed to educate yourself. if you're not interested enough to read pages of information, then it's not ccp's fault you make bad choices. |
low genius
The Sound Of Freedom Renegade Alliance
112
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 17:30:00 -
[105] - Quote
Stands Alone wrote:How about a partial respec? every 6 months, you get to reset 25% of your SP. they would have to add a menu where you can choose the skills that you want to back out of however, up to 25% of course
certainly not. |
low genius
The Sound Of Freedom Renegade Alliance
112
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 17:32:00 -
[106] - Quote
Mike Poole wrote:How many people do you really believe are going to be playing this game for 7.5 years? This isn't an mmo where you have a varied and rich game where people can lose themselves in various aspects and enjoy themselves over long periods. Dust is not an mmo, it's not the new EVE where people will spend years and years and years playing it. Dust is an FPS, it's complexity boils down to shooting stuff. If suddenly you're nerfed to hell and your ability to shoot stuff suddenly screeches to a halt you don't have many alternatives to fall back on outside starting over from scratch with a new setup. There's no "well I can always fall back on X" or "well I still enjoy the Y aspect of the game" or "well I'll just have fun with Z until they fix this" Even then an artificial longevity propagated purely by arbitrarily selected point value goals is not a true longevity. If someone really enjoys a game they don't play it for a year because that's how long it takes to unlock their next skill, they do it because over that year they enjoyed it enough to come back over and over again.
i will be playing this game for a decade. most of the people qqing about respecs will be gone in 6 months. |
low genius
The Sound Of Freedom Renegade Alliance
112
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 17:35:00 -
[107] - Quote
Rynoceros wrote:10,000,000 ISK Available once every 720 hours No skillbook refunding
too cheap
too often |
Edgar-Allan Poe
Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 19:08:00 -
[108] - Quote
Stephen Rao wrote:Nope, bad idea.
While I can get behind a respec upon graduation from the Academy, you're supposed to live with your choices. The best way to learn something is through failure.
Also while every player with 1mil SP wishes dearly that they could respec, just think of how broken the game would become if the players with 14mil could just respec into the flavour of the month whenever they wanted. Adding timers or diminishing returns isn't going to help or change that. As new things come out everyone will have an equal opportunity to skill into it, no need to respec your entire character.
NOPE... If they keep adding new classes and new weapons its certainly a reasonable question and why for life? alot of games have repecs that have to be earned or paid for. It would actually help keep the game afloat.
|
Cross Atu
Conspiratus Immortalis Covert Intervention
1211
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 16:58:00 -
[109] - Quote
Cross Atu wrote:To those still supporting the OP and general respecs please read and respond to in detail my posts #19 & #92. There's a lot of ground to cover and the issues presented within those two posts (as well as other posts not by me) really do require an address before any such idea should be considered for adoption into the game.
Cheers, Cross ^Still this. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |