Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Passive Training Needs Help - Introduce "Active" Training


Deioth
 Share

Recommended Posts

I like passive training, it's one of the things that bring me here, but as some people already said it need changes. In my opinion (and some others too) the pips in a node should have different costs and the requisites to progress should be lowered, this way it's easy to advance but hard to master. This is the EVE way as it has been mentioned and I think it's better than the current model.easy

Another simple and needed change in the direction of specialization is different speeds for the primary and secondary tracks. This way there will be a difference between a pvp crow and a crafting crow. And if a pvper wants a crafting account  at least ACE will get some extra income. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Deioth said:

Many of us would rather see the passive system removed completely and simply make it active like any other skills based game

Yes, yes, might as well change every single part of the core design then we can wait another 2 years while the dev's add evermore PvE systems to fix symptoms of changing the core design. Stop the madness of constant core redesign during development. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Andius said:

I skimmed instead of reading in full. I'm pretty against implementing active training of any form. Even some soft thing with a daily cap. But someone suggested somewhere else that they make their system more like EVE. In EVE, rather than say each point in a skill taking 1000 points the first points can be trained in minutes but the cost goes up exponentially per point in the same skill.

Lower a lot of the prereqs to move on to 3 instead of 4, and do the EVE system. That way people can quickly dive deep into the trees to train the skills they really want to be training faster, but it takes a VERY long time to reach maximum efficiency when you start trying to go 5 points into your areas of specialization.

Make people choose between quickly building a variety of things they can do or being able to fully master a specialization before anyone else can.

I believe this was the original plan and sort of how it worked for a while. Probably changed when they reworked the layout for the umpteenth time.

Wish they would scrap the separate trees/grouping of everything. One or three giant trees that allowed more freedom to choose what we can train would work a lot better.

I don't understand the design that "forces" players to waste so much time on things they don't want to train, especially if the subsequent doesn't even relate to the previous required node. There's a big difference between requiring players to make hard choices (X or Y) compared to what this system is.

EVE, Albion, SWG, EQ AA, POE, so many ways to do it that are less restrictive, more fun, and actually engage players.

Would much rather a more horizontal open system then linear/vertical options pretending to offer choice or complexity.

 


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, APE said:

Would much rather a more horizontal open system then linear/vertical options pretending to offer choice or complexity.

Agree. We simply need a skill tree with many branches and choices and not a skill trunk.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Aedius said:

unknown.png

this was done today in the hurry (the healing crit should be the same) with 1 week late in blacksmith, no reroll ( dust is hard to get with only rank 8+ ), no belt bonuses and no leather or wood craftor.

So yes, you can already craft usefull stuff, not the better, but you can choose the stats.

they have the dura yeah but these arent gonna beat blue dropped or purple frostcasters

hoayaga2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

11 hours ago, Aedius said:

But many of us are here because of the passive system ...
You have multiple choice with active training, we dont.

I genuinely want them to keep the passive system, but it needs more pillars to stand on.  As it is now, it comes off as a stick of balsa wood trying to hold up a bowling ball.  It is wobbly at its best and falling under its own weight any other time.

7 hours ago, Silkhe said:

Active training = in game bots running on scripts ...  No thank you!   It is easily 'cheated'.  

Passive training is there for players that work long hours yet play regularly ...  thanks ACE!  

Passive training is fine if Done Right ...  they just simply have not yet gotten it right.   Every single player account is bottle-necked or time-gated by it, and that's simply a fair system and frankly a big positive.  

Current system is too slow at the start (to get to a viable point in certain specializations).   An early One-Time Passive Points Bonus should be awarded as soon any vessel on an account hits max level,  and also another one time bonus at the completion of any campaign, in which the player participated in, and achieved a minimum player score of 'whatever-ACE-determines'.  These two passive skill point bonuses should essentially be enough (for players starting out) to progress to a tangible point of in-game relevance, in whatever spec they choose... having spent their accumulative & bonus points wisely, that is.  

Keep in mind, that active veteran players will likely always be ahead of (or have an advantage over) new 'active' players that start the game later on down the road regardless, in pretty much any training system implemented.  

I'd suggest that you re-read my proposal.  I am not sure how--especially in a PvP game where players are the content--that bots could in any way possibly generate any value in any meaningful amount of time.  The "Active" training I proposed is in quotes for a reason as normal game play merely allocates passive points faster, and vessel training would feature daily caps and be vessel by vessel only.  Players need to be able to hit a journeyman's level (say a 3 or 4 on a scale of 10) within a single typical campaign's time on a dedicated vessel and averaging 5-10 hours active gameplay a week so they can harvest decent goods, have decent combat stats, or craft decent gear.  Right now, that simply won't happen.  And with crafting especially, there simply is no value other than precise choice of (some) stats on gear that even journeymen level crafters can bring to the table over decent level 25+ wartribe drops.  Some of the issue is the crafting system itself (which IMO also needs some overhauling) but at least players can feel they are making real progress by buttressing the passive system with active components.

 

6 hours ago, APE said:

I believe this was the original plan and sort of how it worked for a while. Probably changed when they reworked the layout for the umpteenth time.

Wish they would scrap the separate trees/grouping of everything. One or three giant trees that allowed more freedom to choose what we can train would work a lot better.

I don't understand the design that "forces" players to waste so much time on things they don't want to train, especially if the subsequent doesn't even relate to the previous required node. There's a big difference between requiring players to make hard choices (X or Y) compared to what this system is.

EVE, Albion, SWG, EQ AA, POE, so many ways to do it that are less restrictive, more fun, and actually engage players.

Would much rather a more horizontal open system then linear/vertical options pretending to offer choice or complexity.

One thing is for sure, basic harvesting takes way too long to complete and genuinely gives nothing except for about 4 or 5 nodes (blood/bones, saddle slot, grit to name a few).  The passive tree seriously needs to feature as few "bad" nodes as possible.  A horizontal with vertical branches could be a good start to improve the passive tree's general issues, but we'll still need supplemental systems to enhance players' sense of accomplishment.  The fact that I can play 60 hours a week and my guildmate 6 and we still achieve the same level of training progress is a surefire way to drive people away.  I can appreciate the passive tree for sure and the idea behind it, but damn it needs more to it.

9 hours ago, Aedius said:

unknown.png

this was done today in the hurry (the healing crit should be the same) with 1 week late in blacksmith, no reroll ( dust is hard to get with only rank 8+ ), no belt bonuses and no leather or wood craftor.

So yes, you can already craft usefull stuff, not the better, but you can choose the stats.

I've found better (certainly comparable) greens in God's Reach.  It is definitely not just passives that need help, but crafting as well.  I still feel like there's compelling reason not to craft until you're maxed/near max--certainly for weapon and armor crafting--given how important lots of exp points are, the perspective that you should only craft blue and better rarity, and how much of a difference additive slots can make.  At the very least, increasing the cap (and making that cap easy to hit for white and just a bit of dedication for green gear) of what the flat damage and armor values can be would go a long way.  The stat bonuses should be where master crafters shine.  A decent crafter should be able to make a "perfect" roll green weapon with at worst 15% less damage than a master crafter making an orange weapon, but the stat bonuses could absolutely be as much as double or more in difference (and these values would be with and without additives et al).  Because the damage/armor values are the most important, this should be the easiest stat to craft and cap out higher than wartribe drops and they really would only need to do this for white and green, a little bit for blue, and barely if at all for purple.

Edited by Deioth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Staff said:

they have the dura yeah but these arent gonna beat blue dropped or purple frostcasters

yes, but when they are better than white, when you know that you wont have the time to farm 6 weapons with the same kind of stats and prefer to kill people or get card point than just farm in pve ...

3 hours ago, Deioth said:

I've found better (certainly comparable) greens in God's Reach.  It is definitely not just passives that need help, but crafting as well.  I still feel like there's compelling reason not to craft until you're maxed/near max--certainly for weapon and armor crafting--given how important lots of exp points are, the perspective that you should only craft blue and better rarity, and how much of a difference additive slots can make. 

Well, with activ system, you will have to craft hundreds of crap. And it's very frustrating when
- you have craft maxout in a few weeks.
- you have to make only crap for hundreds of hours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Deioth said:

The fact that I can play 60 hours a week and my guildmate 6 and we still achieve the same level of training progress is a surefire way to drive people away.  I can appreciate the passive tree for sure and the idea behind it, but damn it needs more to it.

He'll have the same passive training but he won't have your experience or equipment. Please, let people with a life out of the game to have something. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Aedius said:

yes, but when they are better than white, when you know that you wont have the time to farm 6 weapons with the same kind of stats and prefer to kill people or get card point than just farm in pve ...

Well, with activ system, you will have to craft hundreds of crap. And it's very frustrating when
- you have craft maxout in a few weeks.
- you have to make only crap for hundreds of hours.

sorry chief, they arent better than whites, crafting still sucks

Screenshot_30.png

hoayaga2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Staff said:

sorry chief, they arent better than whites, crafting still sucks

Screenshot_30.png

The problem with this is reflected in this article.

https://crowfall.com/en-US/news/articles/item-rewards-and-you

There @thomasblair says "In most cases, the stat and durability values used on a loot item are about 70-80% of the possible maximum values if made by a skilled crafter who landed good experimentation rolls and used the reroll option when crafting". The thing is we're far away from the 70-80% crafting skill so even being lucky we can't compete as crafters.

Edited by Extintor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Passive training is good in my opinion but it needs balance. The simplest solution I would see to improve that is to input a decreasing amount of points into the system.

Something like: basic level, you earn 10 points per tick, then 3 points for second level of mastery and finally, one point like now, for specialization (tier 3)

We experienced these speed during testing. 10 points a tick means passing through basic in a matter of days. 

At 3 points a tick it takes few months to completely finish second tier in one area. 

Finally, third tier would take very long to complete at 1 point a pip.

This decreasing rate would allow players to get through basic very fast and at least be able to use a shovel in the first week while becoming a top notch blacksmith or alchemist would still take months at 3 points per tick. 

There is no interest being stuck at basic level for months. It renders crafters and gatherers completely useless, especially with these r9 nodes everywhere. Still, specialization should take a while and mastery should be very long to reach.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Deioth said:

 

I'd suggest that you re-read my proposal.  I am not sure how--especially in a PvP game where players are the content--that bots could in any way possibly generate any value in any meaningful amount of time.  The "Active" training I proposed is in quotes for a reason as normal game play merely allocates passive points faster, and vessel training would feature daily caps and be vessel by vessel only.  Players need to be able to hit a journeyman's level 

Yes .... script-writers can and will cheat any 'active' or accumulative game-play implementation, regardless of their player/vessel bots being ganked or whatever, during the off-hours times they shall typically run.   And if mobile banking remains a thing, they shall likely even thrive, putting people that work long hours while not cheating your system at further disadvantage.  

We are too far along into development for such substantial & unnecessary changes.   Passive training can be fixed with less effort and resources.  

Someone once told me to shorten my suggestions into deliberate & more concise bullet-points.  You might consider a similar approach, if you want people to read all the way through your suggestions.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Aedius said:

Well, with activ system, you will have to craft hundreds of crap. And it's very frustrating when
- you have craft maxout in a few weeks.
- you have to make only crap for hundreds of hours.

My idea isn't just "Craft 100 daggers" though, it is all activity, and even crafters and harvesters would be expected in any serious guild to be prepared to provide combat support when numbers are needed to control strongholds.  And absolutely nothing in my idea suggests that you could just craft n daggers and hit max blacksmith.  My idea is meant to supplement the passive system, not replace it, so you seem to be making an argument against a suggestion that wasn't made.

15 hours ago, Extintor said:

He'll have the same passive training but he won't have your experience or equipment. Please, let people with a life out of the game to have something. :D

Honestly, even my idea would lead to the same outcome as 6 hours spread out over the week would still get him at passive training cap, but at least the 60 hour a week player would feel like they're earning that increase, AND they'd have the added vessel passive points.  The concept of passive training is good, it just needs proper implementation and supplemental systems.

14 hours ago, Extintor said:

The problem with this is reflected in this article.

https://crowfall.com/en-US/news/articles/item-rewards-and-you

There @thomasblair says "In most cases, the stat and durability values used on a loot item are about 70-80% of the possible maximum values if made by a skilled crafter who landed good experimentation rolls and used the reroll option when crafting". The thing is we're far away from the 70-80% crafting skill so even being lucky we can't compete as crafters.

Yyeeeaaahhhh... I seriously hope they make some much needed tweaks to the crafting system regardless of what happens with the passive tree.

12 hours ago, Galahorn said:

*snip*

Without a doubt they need to approach point costs and pip costs depending on the tree and the node, it is NOT good right now, but none of this would fix the fundamental problems inherent to a pure passive training system.

2 hours ago, Silkhe said:

Yes .... script-writers can and will cheat any 'active' or accumulative game-play implementation, regardless of their player/vessel bots being ganked or whatever, during the off-hours times they shall typically run.   And if mobile banking remains a thing, they shall likely even thrive, putting people that work long hours while not cheating your system at further disadvantage.  

We are too far along into development for such substantial & unnecessary changes.   Passive training can be fixed with less effort and resources.  

Someone once told me to shorten my suggestions into deliberate & more concise bullet-points.  You might consider a similar approach, if you want people to read all the way through your suggestions.  

If this game winds up being easy for bots to settle into, it won't matter if training to master X profession takes a year or a day.  There is a point where concerns over bots can go too far.  Look at BDO and their issues regarding gold sellers and such, they ruined any chance of that game having a real economy just to try and stop gold sellers.  And no, passive training will not and cannot be fixed without giving it supplemental systems to enhance it and player engagement with it.

Edited by Deioth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/28/2020 at 7:36 PM, Deioth said:

  And no, passive training will not and cannot be fixed without giving it supplemental systems to enhance it and player engagement with it.

Hyperbolic wording, but regardless,  I prefer my simpler approach mentioned earlier.   Player engagement & supplemental systems are already imperative, and already working... for the most part?   I suppose I simply find it less broken than you do?   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Progressive pip costs, lowering pre reqs from 4 to 3, and breaking up the "trees" to allow more choice and order of choice solves most of the problems with their take on passive training. Long version here:

 

xqqtx8P.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/29/2020 at 11:18 PM, Silkhe said:

Hyperbolic wording, but regardless,  I prefer my simpler approach mentioned earlier.   Player engagement & supplemental systems are already imperative, and already working... for the most part?   I suppose I simply find it less broken than you do?   

The passive training system is entirely its own thing.  There is no supplemental system.  It also has only one thing you can do to reach any particular thing and it's just straight up time gated regardless of your gameplay.  There is no engagement.  It is missing both because as it exists now it feels bland, not fun, and arbitrarily restricting.  It is not hyperbole to suggest, as my argument strongly contests, that passive training cannot be fundamentally fixed merely through reworking its design and node costs because my argument is that its core is lacking and missing important features.

On 4/30/2020 at 12:21 AM, Duffy said:

Progressive pip costs, lowering pre reqs from 4 to 3, and breaking up the "trees" to allow more choice and order of choice solves most of the problems with their take on passive training. Long version here:

 

The speed, the requirements of picking up "bad" or "useless" nodes, the costs, the requirements, it is all contributing heavily to the mess it sadly is, but I am convinced the root of the problem is that it is 100% hands off and not engaging whatsoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/28/2020 at 2:12 PM, Silkhe said:

We are too far along into development for such substantial & unnecessary changes.   Passive training can be fixed with less effort and resources.  

Are you sure, Didn't Blair say in a stream that current passive tree was designed and redone in a weekend?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/1/2020 at 6:34 PM, mystafyi said:

Are you sure, Didn't Blair say in a stream that current passive tree was designed and redone in a weekend?

I'm not referring to a change to the passive skill tree flow-chart, and the turning of knobs that are already built in.   I am referring to any new 'active progression' game-play changes that likely require new code, back-end system support, inherent rounds of bug-fixing, along with the system server-side + player-side communication & support.  

Just look at how long the passive 'catch-up mechanic' has been such a hot topic... yet ACE has not provided any solid plans?  It must not be all that simple, I am willing to guess?  Regardless, active players that start a game like this months prior to someone else, will always have advantages.   Just marginalize the damn advantages, but don't over-think the inherent process, or give neck-beards or bot-users all the damn advantages either.  The current passive progression system does not discriminate... so thank you ACE from many blue-collar players.  

I backed this in kickstarter over 5 years ago.   How long was our wait from patch 5.100 and 5.110 ?...  G Wizz  

Edited by Silkhe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...