Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 21
11-15-2011, 06:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxrocks
snipped.
I owe you an apoligy. My stance on the skill tree was too pre-emptive.
Upon further testing I have seen little to no bonus for skilling a T5 skill beyond five and it seems to diminishing returns of doing so do return any benefit worth spending those points.
I still find it good for vessel swapping and functional on a whole but its it restrictive to those whom more specialize in a combat role, be that role DPS or CC but not Healing that I can tell at this time.

Quote:
OK, I maxed/near maxed three skills in the T5 range as high as I could and did not change much else.
11/14/2011 1st respec :Tactical
I saw very little return for said investment

Tier 1

SS Weapons training: 9
SS Batteries: 9
SS Hull Repair: 9
SS Flow Capacitor: 9
SS Shield Emitters: 9
Assualt Training: 0
Close Combat training: 0
Away Team Leader: Engineer: 0
Away team Leader: Science: 0
Away team Leader: Tactical: 0

Tier 2

SS Energy Weapons: 9
SS Projectile Weapons: 9
Structual Integrity: 7
SS Subsystem Repair: 0
SS Warp Core efficiency: 7
SS Power Insulator: 0
SS Shield systems: 9
Security: 0
Soldier: 0
Special Forces: 0

Tier 3

SS Maneuavers: 9
SS Target systems: 9
SS Electro-Plasma systems: 0
SS Impulse Thrusters: 9
SS Warp Core Potential: 9
SS Graviton Generators: 0
SS Particle Generators: 0
FireArms: 0
Grenades: 0
Martial Arts: 0

Tier 4

SS Attack Patterns: 9
SS Stealth: 0
SS Engine Performance: 0
SS Hull Plating: 8
SS Shield Performance: 8
SS Intertial Dampeners: 5
SS Sensors: 0
Stealth: 0
Tactics: 0
Threat Control: 0

Tier 5

SS Energy Weapon Specialization: 9
SS Projectile Weapon Specialization: 9
SS Armor Reinforcments: 0
SS Auxullary Performance: 0
SS Weapons Performance: 8
SS Counter Measure Systems: 0
SS Subspace Decompiler: 0
Advanced Warfare: 0
Close combat Protection: 0
Squad Command: 0

Sadly I saw no applicable rise in combat stats such as ACC/CritH/CritS though I did find a good return on power levels of 99/60 80/60 65/55 42/25 allowing for what I assume is good resistance stats and decent speed.
I may owe an apoligy to Foxrocks about diminishung returns for capping certain skills.

Other stats include base line:

86.8% movement based defense 79.8% baseline
ACC 22.3% fully buffed 15% baseline
CritH 8.4% fully buffed 3.5% baseline
CritS 108.3% fully buffed 59.1% baseline


HUll: 34,092
Shields: 10,007

Resists (hull) average 52.3%k > 45.6%d/p > 34.6%rest down to 42.3%k > 39.1%d/p > 24.1%rest

Intertia 60
flight speed 37.57
turn rate 43.2 deg/sec

Once again I saw only a marginal rise of maybe 150 points in damage out put for DHCs/TrtTs and a drop actually of about 2k in DBB damage
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 22
11-15-2011, 10:21 AM
Well i have to say this APPEARS to be a largish step in the right direction. So we won't have to hit rank 9 to access training nodes, there will be a little more front loading and the last few points give more PER skill point compared to the old system. While still not EFFICIENT you do actually get abit more for those last few points IF you want to min/max. With Ground skills being reduced to half or 1/3 i i should still be able to pick up some ground skills while focusing on space skills as this is the part of the game i like more anyway.

see what testing shows and see if we can make things even better. And thanx for pointing out skills are going to 99 so we arn't having the perception of across the board nerfs, that had me worried

biggest issue is how many skills are at the top of the skill tree that is going to make it impossible to focus like we were able to previously. Simply too many teir 4/5 skills with such a large price point.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 23
11-15-2011, 10:58 AM
I like the idea behind the changes that are coming but I'm still a bit disappointed that there aren't more options to spend lower amounts of skill points on in each tier. Some stuff being condensed is good, but things can be more streamlined and intuitive without being overly boring. Investing the skill points is part of the fun! If people don't necessarily like that for customization they can just put a flat amount across the board and still be effective.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 24
11-15-2011, 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainGeko
Exactly. That is the point. In fact, there is a new change coming out soon that will further emphasize this. Space Skills will be:
18 (+18)
36 (+18)
54 (+18)
64 (+10)
74 (+10)
84 (+10)
89 (+5)
94 (+5)
99 (+5)

We hope to get the UI to reflect the 3 "blocks" of "front-loadedness".

The point is, you don't need to put 9 points in each skill. Going broad in a lot of skills, medium in some, and deep in just a couple will actually gain you more effectiveness than what you can do currently on holodeck.

To emphasize this more, Training Nodes will now unlock at Rank 6 insead of 9 - further trying to emphasize that the last 3 points are just for min maxing.

This is just another iteration, so we look forward to your feedback once these changes are live


Let be clear. We didn't cut the number of skills in half and double the cost. We cut the number of skills in half, only raised the cost by 50% (a net gain in buying power), and increased the effectiveness of the early points (front-loading). When we finish the ground skills, those too will be cut down in half or even to 1/3 - giving you even more buying power.

We understand this takes a little getting used to. We appreciate your diligence in testing. Try different builds that are more diversified, and only specialize in a few skills. I think you will find you are quite effective.
Not to knock other people, but these redesigns make perfect sense to anybody versed in math (or min/maxing in games). I also love the Training at rank 6; Engineers weren't hurting in the first build. Though I hope the weird issue my Phaser Beam Arrays dropping by 90 DPS resolves itself in the next build.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 25
11-15-2011, 12:50 PM
I think the reasoning is flawed a little. CaptainGeko says that raising the last few points is something for min-maxers, but I think a min-maxer will exactly avoid ever spending these points. Minmaxing is about getting the most value out of your abilities with the least investment, maximizing benefits and minimizing drawbacks.

The last 3 ranks in a skill are a trap. If you took them, you probably made a mistake, because you really don't get so much benefit out of it that you couldn't use it better somewhere else.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 26
11-15-2011, 02:55 PM
If you max a skill you should get a bonus - either you max a skill and you get a bonus for doing so or you take the minimum and get a build that is diverse.

My Skill Example - Being a Engineer in-game I would like the ability to have a bonus added to my Engineering Team because I maxed the skill and not only took the minimum to get the training ability.

My Bonus Example - The cool down on the ability is quicker or a chance that the ability will give me a better hull repair.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 27
11-15-2011, 03:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Necrion

Is it still the plan to eventually split the ground skills into their own separate skill pool ? Because the bolded part of the above quote would seem to indicate otherwise, at least in the short term.
If they're not separated, we'll still likely get primarily space focused builds

As to the net gain in buying power... It's not as good as you've made it out to be. Instead of Quoting myself ( ), I'll simply refer you to my post on it here. The TL/DR of the post is while we went from 69 space based skills to 33, the effective choices only went from 43 skills on live to 33 with the current system on Tribble. With the 50% price hike... that's pretty painful.

Also, for spending simplicities sake, I really, *really* REALLY prefer 100 skill point Tiers to 150. 100 makes it much easier to spend points in other Tiers as you level, if there's lower Tier skills you want to fill out. 150 point Tiers is very awkward for some reason.

All this being said, I'm looking forward to testing the updated skill system and providing more feedback.
This. I still think the skill point costs are too high with the current build. I would also prefer if the skill point tier costs were in evenly divisible 100 point increments.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 28
11-15-2011, 03:46 PM
I was noticing that in an experiment to see what effect the skills:
SS maneuvers
SS targeting systems
SS attack patterns
SS Energy weapon spec
SS Projectile weapon Spec
SS Weapon performance

had if not skill pointed at all.

When looking at the Attack Stats profile of the ship/Sci pairing I noticed my Ship displayed no accuracy stat what so ever (which seems correct) but I still had the baseline 3.4% critical hit stat and the baseline 59.1% critical severity stat.


My Tac has these same baseline stats of CritH and CritS, yet he has paid into the above skills on a high range.
SS Energy Weapon Specialization ( this skill improves your Starship's starship critical hit and severity with all energy weapons)
SS Projectile specialization ( ditto only with torps )

and yet I see no baseline improvement on my toon that has spent the points.

Why does his stats show the same as a unskilled Character?

Is there a UI bug so as the display does not work properly?

Is the game counting those stats at all?

a curiuos mind would like to know. TY

ps I also ended up with 300 wasted points. Whats up with that?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 29
11-15-2011, 06:41 PM
Thanks for the feedback Gecko. I think the training moved to rank 6 is a good idea and one I was actually considering tossing out there.

I also like that you're going to tweak the front loading, though I don't think it is going to help without reducing skill costs. In fact it may make it more apparent that we are very tight on skill points because the front-loading is being pushed back, thus to get the same effect you have to spend more.

However, the issue still remains, and it is one Mustrum points out. Min-maxing is exactly the type of behavior that makes use of front-loading best. As I pointed out somewhere, if I can buy 8 ranks, spending 8 in one skill would get me 96% effectiveness in that skill, and another skill at base value. However, if I spend 4 in one skill and 4 in the second skill, I now have 72% effectiveness in both, which is a really good trade. Of course that goes to 95% & 0% vs 64% & 64% with the new scaling you are bringing in, so it is not as effective, but only barely so.

Why is this an issue? The fundamental issue is the efficient use of one's skill points. While it is fair to give a good value to jack-of-all-trades, the specialist needs rewarded as well for their single-minded investment. When skill points are scarce, like they are currently, the specialist is extra penalized because rather than say, go to 9 in one skill and 3 in another, they are going to 9 in one and nothing in another. The way the last ranks scale, it is just not worth giving up so many skill points to something for so little benefit.

The scarcity of the skill points has us trying to figure out where to pull points from so we can even get a partially similar build to what we had on Holodeck. Currently it is simply impossible to remake any build to a nearly identical state from Holodeck. It is far too expensive. That may be intended, I don't know, but we are definitely forced to make a lot more hard decisions than we had to before.

The skill tree needs reorganized, many skills split and others merged like I touched on in the first post, to give more value to some skills that have little value, and to lessen the value of others which are far too good or too cheap to pass up.

There needs to be a good reason to go to 9 with skill points being scarce as they are. If the skill point burden can be lessened, then the redone diminishing returns should be fine as it is. However if the skill points aren't changing, then I think something else needs to be done to give people an actual reason to go to 9. Otherwise, about the only skills that are worth going to 9 for are damage and survivability skills, and standard advice will be no more than 6 for anything else.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 30
11-15-2011, 10:50 PM
I'm still thinking that Weapons and Energy skills can be simplified into one skill with multiple layers.


For instance, why put 9 points into Auxillary and Weapon performance when the returns are so small? Why not just make it X Performance, and the more skill points you put into it, the more efficient your power levels are and your performance rises at the same time.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:52 AM.