1 Topic by Neoxx (edited by Neoxx 2011-07-18 00:23:09)

  • M2S
  • Agent
  • Offline

Topic: Attribute Diversification (Reverse engineering builds)

For those who saw this and thought "That looks familiar. Didn't he post this before?" you're right... kinda. I dod post about more diversity in attribute allocation, but it was very tunnel-visioned.  Instead of going at this in a head on fashion to give the players more options to be EP efficient with their builds, I want you to allocate your attributes how you want for an optimal build, then look at that to see if it can be worked into the character creation process.  As the system stands, there's no real EP efficient build for ewar, as they use an odd combo of military and indie based skills. You hace to waste some points in R&D which isn't really needed.

I don't have the standard point values on hand, but keep them within normal values of 32 for your highest attribute and 8/10 for the lowest.  Feel free to pump only 1 of a 'matching' attribute like mechatronics while leaving tactics lower.  I'll update the max attribute points when I get on my pc later.

It might help to use the Perpetuum Planner to explore your optimal build, but it doesn't have the option for custom attributes that I know of.

Once you have an optimal build, discuss how you think it could be attained through new character creation options.  Or just put it out there for others to discuss.  I know there's much better builds out there for a variety of things that the current character creation just doesn't allow.

Suggestions:  e-war, NEXUS, remote repair/energy/buffing, mining (mech without tactics)

->You just lost The Game<-
  • M2S
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Attribute Diversification (Reverse engineering builds)

The main issue with the attribute system is that there are effectively 3 groups of attributes: Military, industry, and social.  You cannot affect 1 attribute in any of the groups without in some way affecting the other attribute.  This means that there is no use in trying to improve a single attribute where you dont need it's partner attribute.  Want to raise politics?  You have to raise economics as well.  Want to raise R&D?  Well, now you're stuck with more heavy industrial.

There are a few very good examples of builds that would focus around 3 attributes, but if you try to raise those 3, you end up with a 4th sucking away extra points that you dont need, which nullifies any benefit of trying it.


Well, being that the Perpetuum Planner is dead, I'll do more theory crafting than actual calculation based on the primary and secondary skills involved with the skills needed.

E-War:
Most of the e-war skills involve Research & Development in some way.  Every single extension in the Electronics section uses R&D combined with Tactics or Mechatronics, which is where nearly all of the relevant e-war extensions lie.  A lot do use it as a secondary skill, but quite a few have it as primary.

If you were to move some of your points from Mech and Tactics without having to pump Heavy Industry in the process, you could be much more EP efficient in that area.  In the past I have made an ewar build, and there actually was a better attribute build that utilized some obscure spark choice or something to gain a small EP advantage, but it was so negligible (2 days EP over a year or something) that it wasnt worth doing.


NEXUS:
This is where things start to heat up.  You would be an idiot to not want Politics, because every single NEXUS skill uses Politics as a primary attribute.  It uses every other attribute as secondary depending on the NEXUS type, but you'd want to have Mechatronics and Tactics as your other attributes for the piloting skills.

I really dont know what most NEXUS pilots do with their attributes for the lack of remembering which character uses them and looking at their profile, so maybe they are Politics spec...  but then that screws them on piloting and general use skills.

->You just lost The Game<-
  • *
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Attribute Diversification (Reverse engineering builds)

Neoxx I have no idea what you actually want, but am in total agreement that the attribute system is in dire need of rationalization.

Newbies should not be forced to make such a huge decision that will affect everything they do for the rest of the game in such an irrevocable manner when they haven't even played the game yet. That right there is a perfect example of how to not do game design. Especially when the relationship between various atts and roles aren't as clear cut as the game leads you to believe they are.

Now, maybe that means things should be reduced to a single question about what kind of character you want: military, industrial, ewar, research etc. Maybe players shouldn't make a decision about their attributes until later in the game.

Or, my preferred option, maybe attributes should go the way of the dodo and we just let people specialize by spending their EP in this or that area. We've already got a great specialization system in the form of diminishing return on ep investment in various disciplines, forcing people to pick a discipline and specialize in it, so why do we need to *** it up with attributes? If they were gone entirely we'd have a nice organic character development system where players aren't penalized for decisions they made before they played the game even once, and instead have a system where players develop their character as they play based on what they've found entertaining to do. Giving skill levels at the start of the game based on questions? Great! But attributes? That *** can't be fixed short of nuking the character from orbit. Bad bad bad bad bad design to have something irrevocable determined that early.

I also think the 20k ep dumped on players at the beginning of the game is a terrible plan. We've had a ton of newbies spend it all immediately only to suffer from buyer's remorse after they realized that small autocannons are a less useful investment than, you know, anything else. Instead, EP gain should be doubled for however long until the player accumulates an additional 20k ep, at which point it reverts to the standard rate. Then they'd have time to, you know, learn what they like and what's useful rather than leaving them with no idea wtf they are doing with a huge load of ep burning a hole in their pocket.

4 Reply by Hawk Firestorm (edited by Hawk Firestorm 2011-08-05 22:46:46)

  • TM-PL
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Attribute Diversification (Reverse engineering builds)

TBH I've never understood games who's design doesn't take into account those that play them.

The vast majority of people enjoy doing many different things, its what makes games like this successful in the first place.

My point is why force people to 'Specialise' and have multiple characters when the vast majority of players simply don't wish to do that?

I have one character and believe as with any game its best if players only have one character, soon as you make alt accounts the norm bad things happen.

Bot groups, RMT you name it.

I'm a firm believer of one player one account.

As a player personally I only wish to have one character thats matches what I do in game, and not be forced to either fork out for 3 accounts to do the same, or have mult characters on one account to do the same.

It's who I'm known by and is a ingame extension of me.

TBH I think not only the attributes need looking at but also at giving a EP bonus to players based on what they do while they are playing the game in the areas that they have been playing.

So characters develope not just by a flat rate but also by what they do in game, to make their character better reflect and represent them.

  • *
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Attribute Diversification (Reverse engineering builds)

AeonThePiglet wrote:

Neoxx I have no idea what you actually want, but am in total agreement that the attribute system is in dire need of rationalization.

Newbies should not be forced to make such a huge decision that will affect everything they do for the rest of the game in such an irrevocable manner when they haven't even played the game yet. That right there is a perfect example of how to not do game design. Especially when the relationship between various atts and roles aren't as clear cut as the game leads you to believe they are.

Now, maybe that means things should be reduced to a single question about what kind of character you want: military, industrial, ewar, research etc. Maybe players shouldn't make a decision about their attributes until later in the game.

Or, my preferred option, maybe attributes should go the way of the dodo and we just let people specialize by spending their EP in this or that area. We've already got a great specialization system in the form of diminishing return on ep investment in various disciplines, forcing people to pick a discipline and specialize in it, so why do we need to *** it up with attributes? If they were gone entirely we'd have a nice organic character development system where players aren't penalized for decisions they made before they played the game even once, and instead have a system where players develop their character as they play based on what they've found entertaining to do. Giving skill levels at the start of the game based on questions? Great! But attributes? That *** can't be fixed short of nuking the character from orbit. Bad bad bad bad bad design to have something irrevocable determined that early.

I also think the 20k ep dumped on players at the beginning of the game is a terrible plan. We've had a ton of newbies spend it all immediately only to suffer from buyer's remorse after they realized that small autocannons are a less useful investment than, you know, anything else. Instead, EP gain should be doubled for however long until the player accumulates an additional 20k ep, at which point it reverts to the standard rate. Then they'd have time to, you know, learn what they like and what's useful rather than leaving them with no idea wtf they are doing with a huge load of ep burning a hole in their pocket.


http://blog.perpetuum-online.com/posts/ … nd-sparks/

Just wanted to say that VICTORY IS MINE. Thanks devs for ditching the stupid and adding the cool. Why, I might even log in when this goes live!