Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Simulator Enhancements (03/13/24)

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 11

Author Topic: New skill system is a step backwards  (Read 22569 times)

Chaos Blade

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 74
    • View Profile
Re: New skill system is a step backwards
« Reply #105 on: April 09, 2021, 01:27:11 PM »

  • Offering a choice between two skills that affect completely different ship types increases the barrier for a player to experiment with new ships. That seems like something the game's design should encourage, not discourage. Shields vs Phase is probably the biggest offender on this front, where one of the skills is always useless for your current ship.
It might be okay if respec is cheap, but it is not if player elites his skills.  Actually, if player changes flagship a lot, and flagship needs different skills to optimize, then respec should be free.

Rather than that, it would be better going with active skills, that is to say you only can have X active skills at a time, but can buy N (with N being bigger than X)
I am not a fan of that solution, but it beats chronic respeccing.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7173
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: New skill system is a step backwards
« Reply #106 on: April 09, 2021, 01:29:34 PM »

Currently technology has the most powerful single fleet buff in T4L: 20% increase to capacity and venting is extremely large. On an Eagle for example is the equivalent of 10 caps and 10 vents for example. Special modifications is a buff to non-story point ships, but without more OP from free hullmods most ships can't truly take advantage of 10 extra vents, so I'd say special modifications is primarily a big buff for story point ships only (and costs a lot of them of course).

Weapon Drills, Crew Training, and then 20% speed either from Coordinated Maneuvers or built in nav relays on enough ships gives a 25% speed buff, +10% damage (at 180 fleet size), 5% less damage taken, and the other benefits of 85% CR to all ships, which is really not bad.
Logged

PeepingPeacock

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile
Re: New skill system is a step backwards
« Reply #107 on: April 09, 2021, 06:42:11 PM »

Now that I think about the industry tree feels like a side grade tree for the other 3 trees rather then a stand alone. It clearly wasn't designed with a 10 point industry build in mind. Do any of the other trees trip over themselves like this?

Leadership also has non combat Tier 5 which has nothing to do with rest of the tree.

Though even more troublesome is the Tier 4 lock. If you take Leadership to 4 or 9, you are forever locked that way. Which is much worse than lock at T5, because at least tech tree is pretty much unconditionally good to have 5 points in.

Leadership and industry were the only trees I ever really used before. I was never about personally fighting and all about saving money and giving buffs to the fleet. I feel like my playstyle has really been gutted by these changes. I need to study these trees more carefully before I step in that leadership beartrap, thanks for the heads up.

I'm so disappointed by the lack of d mod support industry, before I could spec to save supplies on them. Now the only d mod thing is a mutant d mod combat builds... Something I'm sure the combat junkies love to toy with, but it shouldn't be in industry.

Same here, the game practically tells you "do not run large fleets" now with all the penalties you get to your skills. D-mod support should come back and derelict contingent should be changed to a buff to ships without shields.

I feel the system overall in a step in the right direction, but I do have a few issues with the current implementation.
  • Offering a choice between two skills that affect completely different ship types increases the barrier for a player to experiment with new ships. That seems like something the game's design should encourage, not discourage. Shields vs Phase is probably the biggest offender on this front, where one of the skills is always useless for your current ship.
    --snip--

That "choice" isn't really even a choice, it takes all of 3 seconds to look at your flagship and decide what to pick. It would be better if they were combined like they used to be and had a more interesting option to consider instead. You could have it be the shield-less ship buff idea or something crazy like your flagship mounts count as one size larger or turn into hybrid mounts.

Logged

Locklave

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 631
    • View Profile
Re: New skill system is a step backwards
« Reply #108 on: April 09, 2021, 08:30:31 PM »

I find many of the choices to be like this
a) Okay choice/hyper specialized
b) Clearly superior choice that basically everyone will pick
c) Worthless garbage you got forced to pick to reach the next tier you needed.

I now fully agree with the OP. This isn't more choice, it's far less choice and certainly going to create cookie cutter builds nearly everyone will use. I feel like I'm building a character for Grim Dawn or Path of Exile, use the cookie cutter or waste points on things that are inferior.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7173
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: New skill system is a step backwards
« Reply #109 on: April 09, 2021, 09:15:31 PM »

My issue with that is that for point b and c is that so far no one has agreed on what those skills are...
Logged

Locklave

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 631
    • View Profile
Re: New skill system is a step backwards
« Reply #110 on: April 09, 2021, 09:45:22 PM »

My issue with that is that for point b and c is that so far no one has agreed on what those skills are...

Tier 4 Industry is c) if you wanted 10 points in the tree. Tier 5 is c) if you planned on using AI colony leaders. Maybe defining the terrible skills is easier? Because the choices aren't very hard because of connected skills that are far less functional.
Logged

PeepingPeacock

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile
Re: New skill system is a step backwards
« Reply #111 on: April 09, 2021, 10:53:12 PM »

My issue with that is that for point b and c is that so far no one has agreed on what those skills are...

Everyone agrees one of the two industry skills is worthless if you plan on putting 10 points in it.
I've never met a single person that thinks automated ships is the superior choice to special modifications, or fighter up-link to electronic warfare, or  auxiliary support to weapon drills. But even if there are contrarians out there that will tell me how the other is actually the best skill in the game it doesn't really matter.

The problem with the new system is choice and in the case of industry and leadership, theme.
Its irrelevant if I2 are good skills or not if they don't fit the tree. They have nothing in common with the rest of the skills as flagship combat buffs in a tree focused on economy. The skills are always going to be regarded as "Worthless garbage you got forced to pick to reach the next tier you needed" by people that are looking to win battles through superior logistics. The skills being good or not has nothing to do with it.

Someone wanting missile specialization and system expertise for their griffon/wolf is forced to waste 3 skill points on things that are completely or mostly useless to them and that's going to upset them. This problem didn't exist in the old system when players had more control over their builds and that's why its a step backwards and why so many people are complaining about it.
Logged

Sarissofoi

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 405
    • View Profile
Re: New skill system is a step backwards
« Reply #112 on: April 10, 2021, 12:18:43 AM »

I suggest trying builds without tier constraints or limitation to see real worth of various skills.

By the way. I am still disappointed that skills don't let expand hard limits.
Like increasing amount of contacts, or sacrificing ability to govern for large amount of administrators, or skill to cut officers or administrators salary. Etc.
Some skills bonuses feels like magic to be honest. Like Bulk transport that increase capacity instead(for example lifting limits on Logistic Hulls).

SonnaBanana

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
    • View Profile
Re: New skill system is a step backwards
« Reply #113 on: April 10, 2021, 01:05:14 AM »

What if Permanent skills (L4 and T5L) increased non-bonus XP gain?
Logged
I'm not going to check but you should feel bad :( - Alex

Serenitis

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1458
    • View Profile
Re: New skill system is a step backwards
« Reply #114 on: April 10, 2021, 01:39:17 AM »

My issue with that is that for point b and c is that so far no one has agreed on what those skills are...
And no-one ever will, because every player is different, and wants to do different things in different ways, for different reasons.
Which is explicitly why this A or B stuff is never going to work for everyone.

Even if you decide to make it as broad as possible to please as many players as possible, you will always have a non-zero number of people who dislike it.
So you wouldn't be solving the problem, just pushing it on the smaller/less popular group and telling them to deal with it.

The previous iterations of 'open' skill paths were never perfect. But at least they didn't undermine the openness of the game like this one does.
Logged

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4112
    • View Profile
Re: New skill system is a step backwards
« Reply #115 on: April 10, 2021, 02:57:48 AM »

The previous iterations of 'open' skill paths were never perfect. But at least they didn't undermine the openness of the game like this one does.
Eh, it depends. Previously, I had a build that was optimal to me for basically any purpose, except for piloting a carrier (which I didn't want to bother with) or trading (ditto). I could put my skills in a different way, but it would be worse than my regular build. Instead I just did skill-less runs sometimes. Now... I think I would use different skillsets for different fleets, though not that many, mostly because combat seems to be made without looping in mind and because leadership is kinda underwhelming overall currently.

Chaos Blade

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 74
    • View Profile
Re: New skill system is a step backwards
« Reply #116 on: April 10, 2021, 03:40:49 AM »

The previous iterations of 'open' skill paths were never perfect. But at least they didn't undermine the openness of the game like this one does.
Eh, it depends. Previously, I had a build that was optimal to me for basically any purpose, except for piloting a carrier (which I didn't want to bother with) or trading (ditto). I could put my skills in a different way, but it would be worse than my regular build. Instead I just did skill-less runs sometimes. Now... I think I would use different skillsets for different fleets, though not that many, mostly because combat seems to be made without looping in mind and because leadership is kinda underwhelming overall currently.

it probably also depends player to player.
A more open tree, with more options is always going to be better than a restrictive one with OR choices (specially OR choices that seem arbitrary, like L2, or C5)

And yeah I1's magic space folding is kinda of annoying, even if it will be atritted to nothing as the game goes on, I feel more support hulls would have been a better idea. it feels more permanent than a skill that will become less and less the more the game goes on (and there are quite a few of those skills in the perk grid already)
Logged

Locklave

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 631
    • View Profile
Re: New skill system is a step backwards
« Reply #117 on: April 10, 2021, 06:13:52 AM »

Its irrelevant if I2 are good skills or not if they don't fit the tree. They have nothing in common with the rest of the skills as flagship combat buffs in a tree focused on economy. The skills are always going to be regarded as "Worthless garbage you got forced to pick to reach the next tier you needed" by people that are looking to win battles through superior logistics. The skills being good or not has nothing to do with it.

Someone wanting missile specialization and system expertise for their griffon/wolf is forced to waste 3 skill points on things that are completely or mostly useless to them and that's going to upset them. This problem didn't exist in the old system when players had more control over their builds and that's why its a step backwards and why so many people are complaining about it.

Well said sir. I have nothing to add to this but my support.
Logged

Warnoise

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 206
    • View Profile
Re: New skill system is a step backwards
« Reply #118 on: April 10, 2021, 06:16:21 AM »

So the question I would like to ask now is: Will we wait 2 more years for the skills to be balanced/reworked?

Considering the amount of threads regarding skills system, we can safely say that the current skill system wasn't received the way Alex expected I think.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12117
    • View Profile
Re: New skill system is a step backwards
« Reply #119 on: April 10, 2021, 06:20:16 AM »

I do not like the shield/phase split or system/missile split in Combat, when I swap flagships very frequently, sometimes in mid-battle.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 11