Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
Lightsig

Skill System Revamp

Recommended Posts

I have been thinking about the issue of the skill system being uninteresting, and giving little-to-no sense of accomplishment.

Here are two suggestions I want to make:

1) add tiers to each skill grouping at thresholds of total tree completion. These tiers should give general benefits and even possibly general skills.

This should align with the concept of Apprentice, Adept, Grandmaster etc. Essentially, when you reach a certain point in a skill tree you are rewarded in a noticeable and significant way.

 

2) limit the skills a vessel benefits from by its level and give levels a kind of "talent point system" to spend on the skill tree tiers. In this way you could limit the total slotted tier bonuses but essentially give some sense of player progression through giving some interplay between these systems.

This also gives another game lever. You can limit campaigns by certain level thresholds to keep overall account player power from reaching astronomical levels and time gate player power in every campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the only thing the skills system needs is dynamic costs. Right now, each skill node has a set cost and this makes training very linear. What I would like to see is every node within a tree having the same cost, but as you train more in the tree, the costs increase for all of the remaining nodes.

So for example, every node within the crafting basics tree would cost 360 points, but each node you train would increase the cost on the remaining nodes by some amount. This would enable people to unlock recipes for 1 profession very quickly, but it would make it so that it takes longer and longer to unlock each successive profession. It would make it quicker to unlock all of the advanced recipes as well, unless you choose to go for exp/exp points first.

For the combat, race and class trees, they would probably need to change them so that they subsequent trees don't unlock based on total percentage of the prior tree, but instead unlock based on training a certain node, like the exploration basics and crafting basics trees do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TL;DR - reasons.

 

The problem, as I see it, is the lack of an active progression system.

Disciplines are purely a commodity so there is no sense of "progression" there even with the find+grind element. Skill training gives little benefit tick by tick, yet core functionality, in the case of crafting specifically, is provided by the same system, creating a pretty apparent inequity regardless of dependancies -that's a different topic though.

By making classes a baseline element all players start with, they approach an RPG design that is simply not carried over in the rest of the game. If they plan to add more stuff to vessel leveling, that's great, I approve, but this would also likely contribute to an incredibly "samey" character vibe that already exists. Without class specific progression any other generic leveling returns would just further dilute the foundational identity of your character, and not really contribute to player build diversity.

Additionally, there is not enough choice to make the limited action bar really feel like a mechanic of structure - also another topic. But you simply don't net enough diversity in skill availability to be stuck with any hard, character/role defining, decisions. In the end everything boils down to best synergy with disciplines. Incredibly limiting considering the sheer number of choices, but that will always be a matter of "the meta", which will continue to evolve and I'm sure it will see continual tweaks.

As is, I can't see the game being approachable for new players once most are heavily advanced in the passive training which becomes a bigger concern around the soft launch concept. A healthy economy and community will definitely bring people into the fold more quickly regardless of underdeveloped skill training, I concede, but I still believe deeper RPG elements would be a nice distraction when other in-game obstacles seem impassable.

The system I proposed could also provide the means to cap levels by seasons or by campaign, and could serve to keep new players from walking into campaigns where power creep destroys new player experience or heavily guides it towards the direction of other players with no autonomy. A system that inexplicably allows established players to absolutely mop the floor with noobies is also not going to be that fun for either parties.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope they intend to put in mechanism to build X quantity of something.  Load up the interface and go, or do they just expect the players to bot it using 3rd party tools?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how well your suggestions would work in a multi-campaign game like Crowfall. Crowfall will have different campaigns where the devs can control what players have access to (skill wise, armor wise, etc.) in the different worlds. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really should take a page out of ablion online skill system in their destiny board. It's a hybrid passive training and skill training by using said skills to gain experience to further advance the skill. Players need passive training via premium accounts to advance the skill to a set point. Once the set point is reach the completion of the skill can be obtained by in game experience. 

https://albiononline.com/en/guides/article/Destiny-Board+8


Hammers High !!  Master Brewer of the Dwarven Hold Mithril Warhammers

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Unfolded said:

I don't know how well your suggestions would work in a multi-campaign game like Crowfall. Crowfall will have different campaigns where the devs can control what players have access to (skill wise, armor wise, etc.) in the different worlds. 

The idea doesn't mean the original passive bonuses become inactive without skill point placement. You would basically be able to grab larger "active bonuses/skills" based on the vessel level in addition to the passive account leveling. Since the multiple campaigns will already have import and export limitations as needed, or desirable, it wouldn't be unexpected to see vessels as part of export/import considerations.

This could be a way to not only stop the influx of goods that import rules might seek to avoid, but also stop veteran accounts from immediately saturating the world with "end-game" quality items. While ranks of materials will also be gated by the unlocking of linked worlds as ArtCraft has mentioned, even having maxed out crafting skills will mean higher quality gear due to their skill, even with lower level materials avalable, allowing more power earlier on than might be desirable for the starting point of a campaign or the ideal progression of it. I mention that because in the case of crafting maybe you could move some of the components out of the psssive training and into the active leveling progression for those trees.

It's also another lever that would be good to have, and it's way to incorporate more general abilities that could compete for bar space, and be more universally accessible by all players, but maybe not as unique or powerful as what is acquired through Disciplines. This would give them more freedom to limit other game components (races or classes, or class-race combinations, or disciplines) without completely destroying the way players have invested in their skill training.

Edited by Lightsig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@thomasblair

It would also be nice if we could also use left click to place training time and right click to subtract, making a skill placement limbo of sorts. Requiring players to submit their final placement rather than tick by tick. Sometimes you don't know how far you will get with your hundreds of thousands skill points, and making a split second wrong decision hurts more than it would if they were only retrospective mistakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...