TBH, just copy paste EVE skill tree; it was misinterpreted to begin with.

"You have to specialize" is a phrase I hear a lot, but it was actually originally just a piece of new player advice (one created by players, not devs). This was also misinterpreted; we are locked into our choices (unlike EVE, where you build upon your choices to diversify your range of specializations). This piece of advice originated from the fact that there are only 5 levels for each skill in EVE, and as such a newbie can hit the veteran efficiency plateau faster by picking something specific, then you expand from there and branch into specializations that have some skills in common with what you've already trained. It was not meant to convey the message that "you pick one thing and that's all you ever do".

DUST fails at this; if you want to diversify, you often need to go all the way back down the skill tree and start from scratch.

Case example:

In EVE: Small Autocannons and Artillery use the same source skill: Small Projectile Turret Operation. It's first at Tech 2 that you can 'specialize', and even then it's only one skill (e.g. Small Autocannon Specialization). Specialization here is as broad as "I'm good at using small projectile weapons". You can then build on these skills to reach medium sized guns. A specialization in Small Autocannons includes skills that aren't linked to Autocannons specifically; such as Rapid Firing (which benefits all turrets). And importantly, deciding that you want to do Hybrids instead of Projectiles conserves the usefulness of the SP spent on all but 2 skills in this case (Small Projectile Turret Operation and Small Autocannon Specialization). Finally, all of these skills are worth training to 5 in the long run.

In DUST: Each weapon has 5-6 skills that only affect it. Want to train a different weapon? What a shame, none of those skills apply to others, and you'll have to train those 5-6 skills that do the exact same thing again. Each requires multiple million SP invested. A specialization in a given weapon is entirely within the 5-6 skills that were added with that weapon, and 'belong' to it. Finally, some of these skills aren't worth training to 5, while others are mandatory to 5.

Unlike EVE, where the vast majority of skills help you towards your next specialization, DUST has a system where the minority of skills are useful beyond a specific piece of equipment. This creates a sense of "SP sinks".

So it bares repeating: the important part isn't if it looks like a tree or not; the important part is how much SP (player time and effort) is locked into a given specialization, and therefore how much SP is to be considered "useless" when chasing a new specialization. The more SP is useless to any other specialization, the less people will diversify, and the lower the actual depth of the skill tree becomes.

Compared to EVE's; DUST's skill tree looks like one you'd find in a theme park game. And it's not for a lack of skills, it's in its structure.

e: We used to have a size specific blanket system, but that wasn't implemented very well either (we still had operation skills for specific weapons rather than size and type, and the blanket skills were size specific). Uprising was a step backwards w/ regards to the skill tree.

Because they can't sell active boosters otherwise.
They need to add as many reasons as possible to try to get people to pay.

They would definitely have to be character bound.

Boosters are indeed what people would call "P2W" (disclaimer, I use them). They increase the amount of SP attainable, rather than only making you reach the attainable SP faster. Passives are the biggest no-no here.

Player market would solve a bunch of issues with boosters, but overall just no; they're essentially mandatory.

A subscription option would be great for the case of boosters:

Subscribers get unlimited access to vanity items for the duration of their subscription, with the caveat that:

-+ Terminating the subscription removes any vanity items that have not otherwise been unlocked with AUR.

Subscription is the only way to gain the effects of boosters, that is:

-+ All SP gain is turned passive, but is not overall increased.
-+ SP from matches treats you as if you had hit your cap, and is not boosted.

Subscriptions work like PLEX for EVE and can thus be sold to players for ISK.

Subscriptions can also be bought with AUR.

I'd subscribe in a heartbeat if it meant I didn't have to grind my cap every week (hint, I don't log in because I want to grind SP, I log in because I feel like MurderTaxi'ing (or otherwise playing the game)).

in reference to the quote about the skill trees*

the previous builds had 'generic' weapon proficiencies, sidearm, light, and heavy weapon categories had broad sharpshooter, rapid reload, capacity, and fitting cost modifier(operations? i forget what they had it named)... they scrapped this when they came out with the new skill tree to 'add content' and slow progression... it used to be a fraction of the SP to master all light weapons compared to what it is now... but people ran out of skills to upgrade... so they split them...

to a degree, this decision makes sense, if you were to configure a load bearing vest(LBV) to hold extra ammo for a rifle, the same configuration might not work for grenades(mass driver)...

this also makes sense with the COMPLETE lack of non-combat skills... if we had properly fleshed out skills for production and trade(AT BARE MINIMUM), science and industry(would provide additional content if theyd EVER introduce production)... something to spend SP on besides simply shooting eachother in the face until it stops being funny, we could have gotten by with the more flexible generic weapon upgrades

but as things stand now... people are going to max out their weapon specialties eventually, and then CCP will introduce new weapons, and they will be garbage compared to a fully upgraded proto rifle with 25% bonuses to EVERYTHING... CCP has shot any new weapon content squarely in the foot as far as i can see...

as far as passive SP grind**
i think it would be a better option to take away the bonus SP gain, it would do away with a vast majority of the AFK campers. it only equals out to 190k SP/Week, 27k SP/Day, 1.1k SP/Hour, 18 SP/Minute, 0.3 SP/Second ...

as for the reward for playing well, active SP(the 1k sp/battle cap), people play how many other games with no reward beyond KDR... if they enabled player driven economy and industry, the ISK/equipment would start going up untill wallets started running dry, and we would again find a balance like EVE has... so there WOULD be a grind for ISK still... and it would finally have meaning once player econ is properly in place...

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Av9Nu-aYnw1LdHlpY2xxaHQ2QS1mYW1sejA0R0FtMGc#gid=0

its a bit outdated, i havent had access to eve accounts for a while to check up on any changes to BPO material requirements, but i spent countless hours working on a spreadsheet for a game...

i have gotten my buddies into industry by getting them to start their own spreadsheets... one of their wives bitched at me that he spends more time 'working' on his game than his ACTUAL work...

spreadsheets in space... more fun than DUST...

Do you think there is any hope whatsoever? They are really just catering to a casual crowd it seems to get as many players as they can, but honestly, the perked ears and the interest came from the promise of something more complex stemming from one of the most deep and complex MMOs out there.


People came here looking for EVE in a different format; EVE as a different experience to enjoy, with its nuances,complexity, and politics. Instead they've caved under the pressure and their apparent inexperience with the genre and instead gave us another bland shooter that unfortunately fails to even amount to that.