So the finest minds of IRC has been working away and have decided the idea that a borderlands style levelling system would be ideal, namely that what you use you level up. So using a gallente assault nets you points in gallente assault but nothing else, and the same with all the weapons. As for CCP making money I personally think some kind of sp token could be used. An sp token would give you a lump of sp that you could put into any skill you want, helping you reduce the grind but not making any thing aurum only.

Source

Anybody else disturbed by that fact that if this comes to fruition, no-lifers and boosters will get to run rampant?

What's IRC?

A chat channel for Dust 514. The devs are on it quite a bit too.
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=22699

AFAIK, he was being facetious.

Meh, it's a neat idea but we already have system and i see no reason to replace it for the amount of work it would take alone.

How would you level suits, gear up? Based on use alone or auto distributed from a common pool? If so, what if i want to focus on my gun instead. Do we want two seperate systems instead? If so, again, for what benefit?

It would also mean that you can't just save SP to lump in a weapon or item that you cannot currently use effectively. You'd have to run a gimped fit until you reach the required level unless you want to buy a token which would summon p2w discussions.

I change my meh to no, sorry.

How would that work with weapons, equipment and modules that don't have a militia version?

Source

Anybody else disturbed by that fact that if this comes to fruition, no-lifers and boosters will get to run rampant?

I'm disturbed that you can read some bullshit handwaving about replacing the SP system entirely and come away thinking its a serious idea.

Actually it's a semi-serious idea, that a small amount of thought and time was spent on. I just wrote that and stuck it on the forums, so it wasn't lost forever in the IRC chat logs, it's a much more logical way of structuring the SP system, what you use you get better with, rather than the using a use an AR to learn how to use an LAV method we have now. I acknowledge that to do something like this would require significant time and effort, and this idea has several kinks to be worked out, but you shouldn't dismiss an idea because you deem it "bullshit handwaving". If you're going to criticise ate least have the decency to state why you disagree with it.

I can't believe they would even consider something like this. If you think AFKing is bad, imagine a bunch of people pew-pewing away with ARs looking for that little "AR skill increased" notification. Not only that, but it's going to increase the gap between newberries and veterans even more while punishing people who don't have time to play 24/7, just like people now who don't cap every week. The SP system we have now is currently flawed, I agree with that, but this isn't the answer. I'd rather see them consider that weekly cap rollover we were promised, or a fully passive SP system.

I can't believe they would even consider something like this. If you think AFKing is bad, imagine a bunch of people pew-pewing away with ARs looking for that little "AR skill increased" notification. Not only that, but it's going to increase the gap between newberries and veterans even more while punishing people who don't have time to play 24/7, just like people now who don't cap every week. The SP system we have now is currently flawed, I agree with that, but this isn't the answer. I'd rather see them consider that weekly cap rollover we were promised, or a fully passive SP system.

The point of the game is to shoot people, is rewarding people for actually using a weapon really that bad? The people you say are "pewpew'ing" away with AR's would most likely have just run about shooting people with the weapon anyway.

What if you want to skill into something other than what you're using? This would destroy cross training.

I would imagine that the Active SP would be applied equally to all of the skills involved while there'd be no change to Passive SP.

So for example, if I killed you with an SMG while wearing a Minmatar Logi suit fitted with a repper, a plate, a damp, a precision enhancer, a damage mod and a myofibril, the SP/WP I recieved for killing you would be divided and applied to all of the skills involved in my suit.

SP/WP gained from equipment would be applied directly to the appropriate skill for that type of equipment.

SP/WP gained from grenade kills would be applied directly to grenadier.

IDK how Orb SP/WP would be handled, though I'd imagine it could be added straight to your passive pool.

I can't help but feel that the most significant impact of this would be a reduction of my own choices. What if i choose to switch my plate with a shield extender? Do i have to run with a low tier unbonused extender for weeks? The lower tier extender would likely diminish my combat prowess, leading to slower progress due to fewer kills/WP in all areas, not just the new extender.

It would disintevice changes to the fit as changing gear without direct and prolonged negative impact is much harder since distributable SP is greatly reduced.

It would decrease my ability to focus my SP on the things i need the most.

It would force me to play with certain gear as much as possible even if it's supposed to be highly situational and not viable in many matches.

The above combined would lead to the inevitable boosting. Sure you could add caps and special rules but both entail a risk of punishing legit players and further complicate the SP system with rules i would need to know and understand. I think any incentive of "unnatural" behavior should be avoided to begin with. The fact that this can be dealt with is not an argument in favor of it.

With that said, the most important question is still: What is the direct benefit for me as an average player? Why bother in the first place?

Massive changes are not just done for the heck of it.

Personally, I like the idea and I think that with the retention of Passive SP the things you cite as being problems wouldn't be.

However, having said that, I have to agree with your closing sentence.

This is why I was proposing it LAST YEAR (emphasized for the "finest minds of IRC").

Passive SP doesn't eliminate the issue, it only makes it possible to bypass by waiting for excessively long periods of time which, honestly, is worse than now. Now I can use everything at my disposal, either well or poorly skilled elements, to increase my rage of useable options. Under this system I can only use the passive pool or that individual tool. It doesn't help with any of the perceived failings of our current system and adds unnecessary inflexibility.

Lulz, people still hung up on the irc part?

Personally, I like the idea and I think that with the retention of Passive SP the things you cite as being problems wouldn't be.

However, having said that, I have to agree with your closing sentence.

This is why I was proposing it LAST YEAR (emphasized for the "finest minds of IRC").

Why wouldn't they be?

I've been in there. it's horrible.

The problem with passive SP is that there isn't enough substance to the game to support it. Nobody would want to log in if they're not pressured to cap every week. If there were enough to do, like PVE, FW/PC that mattered, more maps, a skill tree that acts like a skill tree, (instead of linear SP sinks) passive SP wouldn't be a problem. If you think it would affect new players, just do what EVE does and give players an accelerated SP gain until a certain point so they can catch up.

Actually it's a semi-serious idea, that a small amount of thought and time was spent on. I just wrote that and stuck it on the forums, so it wasn't lost forever in the IRC chat logs, it's a much more logical way of structuring the SP system, what you use you get better with, rather than the using a use an AR to learn how to use an LAV method we have now. I acknowledge that to do something like this would require significant time and effort, and this idea has several kinks to be worked out, but you shouldn't dismiss an idea because you deem it "bullshit handwaving". If you're going to criticise ate least have the decency to state why you disagree with it.

It's fine as long as you don't argue with beers, that's a mistake.

Lastly I'd like to know what your idea of a skill tree is. How does ours not act the part?

Can't forget to not show independent thought and only kowtow to the self-proclaimed "elite" overlords that IMHO CCP seems to encourage.

Source
After some extended play in Uprising, there seemed to be a little something missing from Dust 514. I couldn't quite put my finger on it, but something was missing compared to Chromosome. After some discussion in game, observing some battles, and paying attention to the forums, I think I figured out a problem that needs to be addressed.

The current dropsuit/skill system promotes Power Creep
In Chromosome, the Standard, Advanced and Prototype dropsuit system worked for several reasons:

• ISK was a balancing factor that prevented prototype spam. Prototype was so expensive, that it was limited to CBs. In pub games, using strictly prototype could seriously hurt the user's income and added more value to STD/ADV fittings.
• Prototype weapons were kept in check because prototype suits were too expensive for everyday use. If a player wanted to use a prototype weapon, they had to either use a prototype suit or give up something on a lower meta level suit to fit it.
• VK.1, T-II, and B-Series sub variants within the suit tiers offered incomperables that balanced dropsuits to be better in different situations, not just all around better. Shield/Armor imbalance in Chromosome didn't fully allow this to come to fruition, but having more choices in a player's fitting selection rather than more raw power was a healthy encouragement.

With all these examples, power creep was at a minimum. Even though there was a sufficient gap between STD/ADV/PRO weapons, the economy prevented everyone from running around in the best gear in the game at all times. This allowed newer players to at least have somewhat of a fighting chance despite the SP gap, veteran players with more SP could specialize in different roles without sacrificing their overall effectiveness and players that did narrow themselves into one specific role were properly rewarded as they should. But when prices were lowered, beta players received a refund for all of their assets, and the changes to the skill tree became more dropsuit, weapon and vehicle specific, this delicate balance was thrown off and created a situation of power creep:

• Prototype dropsuits are too commonplace, therefore making prototype equipment more commonplace as well. Pub matches have degraded into a situation where whoever has the most veteran players winning.
• Because of the abundance of prototype, all players are forced to specialize in one specific role just to compete. This limits how many different roles/fittings a person can use.
• Players that specialized in more than one role are even less effective because the gap between one prototype fitting vs 2~3 STD/ADV fittings available is too wide.
• It's harder for newer players to be able to have a fighting chance. With everyone running prototype, a player has the option of either AFKing for the SP they need to compete, enduring the unnecessarily extensive struggle to be competitive, or quit. Many of which choose the latter.
• Many veteran players are burned out. If you're stuck in one role, it's going to get old. This is why we see so many topics, requesting respecs. Nobody wants to be completely locked into one role like we are now. The common mentality seems to be that you have to grind into prototype X in role Y because it's the only way to compete, it shouldn't be this way. STD/ADV gear is severly devalued because prototype is readily available, more rewarding, and a minimal risk of losing it.....

TBH, I gave up on this idea awhile ago.

I really have no real desire to discuss it further, between your statement of "Massive changes are not just done for the heck of it" and Cosgar pointing out it wouldn't be very feasible without a full and complete reset, I see no point in beating an imaginary horse.

IDK, personally I like the idea because it makes sense to me (practice makes perfect), though only if it had been what we started with (or at least what we had at the beginning of Open Beta).

Just because I like the idea doesn't mean I don't agree with the two aforementioned statements.

/shrug

This doesn't show failing to the skill system itself, rather that the cost of operating at the top end of it isn't high enough to be prohibitive and/or other isk related factors are involved allowing proto to be run more often than it should be.

Actually, per this the skill system is fine so long as operating at the top of it is costly enough. The one real reference here is the idea of things becoming more specific with the skills. Ironically, it actually became more of a tree, and closer to the idea of the statement quoted in the op as well. So the question still remains, what, aside from slowing down the act of being the best in a wider variety of skill based aspects, really changed? And what makes this a failing of a tree, and more importantly, what is a good tree?

A good tree should have a wide selection of skills that reward generalists and specialists alike. If you invest in X, Y and Z, you may never be as effective as the guy who fully invests in W but you'll be more flexible. The way the tree is now, you're pretty much locked into your role. Think about it, how many people have you been in a squad with that were able to switch to 2-3 different roles on the fly? If you look at the vehicle skill tree, that's a real skill tree because pilots aren't strictly limited to one role, but can spread themselves out because their vehicle tiers are a series of incomparables- crappy incomparables at the moment, but you get the point.

Edit: The author of this topic has the right idea on how a skill tree should look. (Direct all +1's to J-Lewis)

It's fine as long as you don't argue with beers, that's a mistake.

What's IRC?

It's fine as long as you don't argue with beers, that's a mistake.