DUST Search - The only respecs I would approve...

Chunky Munkey wrote:

Malkai Inos wrote:

Those are sound propositions but they already assumed that respecs are a worthwhile feature to begin with. Why?

The primary function of the skilltree is to give your choices weight. One can play it safe and follow a more generalist approach to be secured from potential changes in the meta, be it from balance or new content, or double down on one class and get max performance at the risk getting smacked in the likely event of changes.

True, participating in PC pretty much requires you to double down in order to be competitive but this largely due to the general notion that one has to double down in the first place. If players where to accept that respecs are not going to happen, barring a catastrophic event, they would in general be more cautious with their SP, reducing the overall performance pressure (less so in PC but more so everywhere else) so that the problems respecs are supposed to fix wouldn't be there in the first place.

Most of the issues that respecs are supposed to fix are either directly caused by the notion that we should have respecs in the frist place or really have nothing to do with how the SP system operates at all.

Everyone is looking for a solution to implement respecs without breaking the skillsystem and many other core concepts of the game yet most of the threads i've seen on this subject completely bypass the question wether or not the lack of respecs has distinct advantages that will be lost forever.

Respecs are worthwhile because they offer a change to gameplay. It's fine to say that we can skill into something else from scratch, but closed beta vets will tell you just how disheartening that starts to feel after the 3rd or 4th go.

Nobody is just accepting that we are inevitably going to get respecs, and the calls for respecs aren't at all based on such a belief.
Players just don't want to have to nerf their performance to see what else the game has to offer.

Do you not think a 6month cooldown gives choices weight? We're only 2months into the game and there are already people desperate for a respec.
The gravity of your decisions is important, but we have to weigh that against the tediom that comes from following the same people around with a rep tool for the summer.

You have to accept the possibility that the game you want Dust to be may well be a game with an average population of a few hundred.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Malkai Inos Opus Arcana Covert Intervention 941	Posted - 2013.07.31 15:33:00 - [1] - Quote Those are sound propositions but they already assumed that respecs are a worthwhile feature to begin with. Why? The primary function of the skilltree is to give your choices weight. One can play it safe and follow a more generalist approach to be secured from potential changes in the meta, be it from balance or new content, or double down on one class and get max performance at the risk getting smacked in the likely event of changes. True, participating in PC pretty much requires you to double down in order to be competitive but this largely due to the general notion that one has to double down in the first place. If players where to accept that respecs are not going to happen, barring a catastrophic event, they would in general be more cautious with their SP, reducing the overall performance pressure (less so in PC but more so everywhere else) so that the problems respecs are supposed to fix wouldn't be there in the first place. Most of the issues that respecs are supposed to fix are either directly caused by the notion that we should have respecs in the frist place or really have nothing to do with how the SP system operates at all. Everyone is looking for a solution to implement respecs without breaking the skillsystem and many other core concepts of the game yet most of the threads i've seen on this subject completely bypass the question wether or not the lack of respecs has distinct advantages that will be lost forever.
Malkai Inos Opus Arcana Covert Intervention 941	Posted - 2013.07.31 16:22:00 - [2] - Quote Chunky Munkey wrote: Malkai Inos wrote: Those are sound propositions but they already assumed that respecs are a worthwhile feature to begin with. Why? The primary function of the skilltree is to give your choices weight. One can play it safe and follow a more generalist approach to be secured from potential changes in the meta, be it from balance or new content, or double down on one class and get max performance at the risk getting smacked in the likely event of changes. True, participating in PC pretty much requires you to double down in order to be competitive but this largely due to the general notion that one has to double down in the first place. If players where to accept that respecs are not going to happen, barring a catastrophic event, they would in general be more cautious with their SP, reducing the overall performance pressure (less so in PC but more so everywhere else) so that the problems respecs are supposed to fix wouldn't be there in the first place. Most of the issues that respecs are supposed to fix are either directly caused by the notion that we should have respecs in the frist place or really have nothing to do with how the SP system operates at all. Everyone is looking for a solution to implement respecs without breaking the skillsystem and many other core concepts of the game yet most of the threads i've seen on this subject completely bypass the question wether or not the lack of respecs has distinct advantages that will be lost forever. Respecs are worthwhile because they offer a change to gameplay. It's fine to say that we can skill into something else from scratch, but closed beta vets will tell you just how disheartening that starts to feel after the 3rd or 4th go. Nobody is just accepting that we are inevitably going to get respecs, and the calls for respecs aren't at all based on such a belief. Players just don't want to have to nerf their performance to see what else the game has to offer. Do you not think a 6month cooldown gives choices weight? We're only 2months into the game and there are already people desperate for a respec. The gravity of your decisions is important, but we have to weigh that against the tediom that comes from following the same people around with a rep tool for the summer. You have to accept the possibility that the game you want Dust to be may well be a game with an average population of a few hundred. Respecs offer a change of gameplay. An instant one that requires no effort other than the work you do for earning that AUR. This in principle lessens the "decisions have weight" concept more or less, depending on cooldowns or other rules by allowing you to circumvent fundamental game mechanics through external factors which is already a bad thing in my book. Yes, cooldowns preserve part of the weight. They also incidentally diminish the utility of respecs as (you already pointed this out) those in favor of respecs are already seemingly fed up with what they have after just under three months. This begs the question wether these respecs are of significant value after the first use. Six months are demonstrably enough to nearly max out any one role. Why bother then if i'm generally better off just saving up SP and having a viable secondary role long before the cooldown runs out? We can reduce the cooldown but this amplifies the negative consequences again. And i also have to accept the possibility that a thermonuclear war wipes out the tranquility server in london and i will never be able to play dust again. I cannot properly quantify either possibility so i see little value in basing my personal positions on such scenarios.
Malkai Inos Opus Arcana Covert Intervention 941	Posted - 2013.07.31 16:30:00 - [3] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: Protocake JR wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: The only way I'd support Respecs at all would be if everyone got one and they had a 12 month cooldown (similar to Remaps in Eve). Why? Gravity and Consistency. Make your choices wisely, don't spec into the obviously OP and then cry a river when it gets nerfed. Make your choices based on what is most fun, not what is the goto OP fit for all of the athlete wannabes. The problem is that remaps in eve offer no instantaneous change whatsoever. Not a single SP is transfered in the process and attributes need to be distributed based on long term planning to provide any benefits which is the opposite of the impulsive behavior that respecs enable. I'd be generally fine with an attribute system, similar to eve, and remaps of those for that matter. In the end though it's just another layer of complexity that every player has to know and understand in order to not hinder their progress even further so we could just not bother instead.
Malkai Inos Opus Arcana Covert Intervention 941	Posted - 2013.07.31 16:42:00 - [4] - Quote Chunky Munkey wrote: snip Chunky Munkey wrote: You cannot compare the very real possibility that this game will die, to that of London getting nuked. And I cannot continue an exchange with someone who simply asserts his conclusions rather than supporting them. Both possibilities are based on mere conjecture with little more than subjective perception to support them. Neither have been quantified in any way so i fail to see what the difference is other than one of them being blunt hyperbole to get a point accross. No one denies that not granting respecs makes some people leave the game. This does not mean however that the game is doomed because of it as there are numerous people who can accept and even prefer a "no respecs" approach. Again, without proper quantification i can not see how you discern one hypothetical event from the other. If you can point out where i failed to support my conclusions feel free to do so and i will do my best to correct this lapse.
Malkai Inos Opus Arcana Covert Intervention 945	Posted - 2013.07.31 17:57:00 - [5] - Quote Chunky Munkey wrote: No quantification? 1)Dust's numbers have consistently dropped since release. 2)They merged it with Eve's numbers to hide the decline,3) and since then they've merged two entire game modes to hide it even more. 1)Numbers are going up lately and, generally, i don't know what else you'd expect in a game with a NPE and multiple other issues as atrocious as dusts. 2)That's one interpretation and weak one at it since CCP have made no efforts to hide the actual numbers in the API. 3)Again only one possible explanation and without any confirmation one that i don't feel inclined to share, based on the fact that neither modes had any matchmaking troubles with the current player count. Chunky Munkey wrote: The release of The Last Of Us dented numbers severely, and games like Destiny have the potential to obliterate them. The release of a AAA title of that magnitude was expected to dent the numbers temporarily. They have since recovered and, based on that, i see no immediate reason to predict a different outcome for similar situations in the future especially on a completely different platform. Chunky Munkey wrote: If you consider numbers and actions to be "subjective perception" then I don't know how you make it through your day without doubting the floor beneath your feet. I think the above made clear why numbers and actions leave plenty space for "subjective perception" and tbqh reducing the current numbers to just the lack of respecs ignores all the other issues with the game, most of which are supported by a much clearer consensus. Chunky Munkey wrote: The arguments you've proposed in this thread seem to be against respecs in general, despite this not being the subject. I already answered your concerns in my OP. I admit that my points are not necessarily on the subject but i think that the question "do we need respecs?" should precourse the question "how do we implement respecs". Based on this i think that my points are still relevant and your OP left me unsatified in regards to answering the "why" question in addition to the "how" question.
Malkai Inos Opus Arcana Covert Intervention 954	Posted - 2013.08.01 00:25:00 - [6] - Quote Chunky Munkey wrote: They've made no attept to hide numbers? Are you serious? I never claimed they didn't. I challenged the claim that they did. I take it you know the difference. I'd like to repeat that accurate data on player numbers is still readily available through the API. Chunky Munkey wrote: Your last section includes a logical fallacy called "begging the question". Let me rephrase then. For the answer to the question of how to implement a respec feature to inform a course of action, it requires the question wether or not a respec feature is needed at all (basically a cost/benefit assessment) to return a positive conclusion beforehand. That's the point i was trying to make and the reason why i deem my posts relevant to the subject as long as your OP tries to be more than a purely hypothetical "what if" scenario. Chunky Munkey wrote: The rest is such a steaming pile of non-sequiturs that there really isn't any use continuing this. This, just as the above is an argument from fallacy and not at all helpful to advance the discourse. I assume this was intended and disengage from this particular exchange.