View Single Post
06-29-2013   #27 (permalink)
NoobJr
ggFTW Fan
NoobJr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 145
iTrader: (0)
NoobJr is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Sounds more like you're complaining about your class being nerfed than the actual system being flawed.
I've done both things, really. First I talked about my issues with the system itself, and since the point of still having fun was mentioned, I went into detail why I'm not having fun with the new skills.
And there's also the non-personal point there that since everyone was nerfed, party play is more balanced.

Quote:
Highlighting both PvE and PvP isn't a good idea in MMOs either because not everyone necessarily enjoys being forced to do PvE in order to PvP. Plenty of people want to stick to just one side of the game.

A better solution would be to allow players to have two separate builds - one for PvP and one for PvE.
Agree with that. I myself always tend towards PvE. And Elsword is no exception to PvP being optional but PvE not, because you need it to get stuff.
Since they went through the trouble of making a binary skill choice system, allowing a PvP and PvE build would make sense.

Quote:
This is completely opinionated and I would rather not discuss the entire history of Elsword case by case, so I'll just say I disagree and leave it at that.
I intentionally didn't go into imbalance or the business method because it isn't the point and I'm not an expert on that, but I have always analysed the game design independently of those things in the same way I've analysed it now, and it always had plenty of good points.
But I might give them too much credit sometimes because I started by comparing it to Grand Chase.

Quote:
I hope you're aware that 90% is also extreme. 30% may be a little too restrictive, but there is nothing inherently wrong with making choices.
And I don't see why they had to go from one extreme to another. There is nothing inherently wrong with having no choices either, it's all about how it works in the game. Since everything was designed with the old system in mind, this extreme transition is causing problems. They shouldn't have been so dramatic with it.

Quote:
Balance issues can be argued during any point in the history of the game, not just this skill tree update.
Well, I summed up people's complaints since he asked why they were mad.
The lack of play testing is an important point. Since gameplay is the core of this game, throwing an update that changes everything without much testing is just asking for backlash and drama. Especially when they hyped it with "100 new skills!" while hiding that you'd only have 1/3 of your skills.

Quote:
"Variety"? You're telling me your build before this update had "variety" when it involved maxing everything and just spamming Sword Fire/Sword Enchant? The binary choice forces variety because you can't get everything.
No, by variety I meant your layout (thx for the vocab), the skills you actually use in a mission.
Since you had everything, you could try out everything and find what works best for you. Because of that, I hardly ever saw someone using the same skills as me. There would be people with Wind Blade, Assault Slash, Splash Explosion. People with Phoenix Talon or Rising Slash instead of Sword Fire.

Now, thanks to the needlessly restricting binary choice system, some skills are gonna be shut out not because they're useless (like in the old system), but because their alternative is much more important.

Assault Slash has to compete with Sword Wave, which fills your WoTS bar almost instantly and is pretty much essential now. Sword Enchant might still get picked but there's a new Critical Sword skill that might compensate not having it, so it might be gone too.

So they added a new way for skills to be ignored from your whole build. Not because they're worthless or low priority, not even because having both skills would be OP (which is one of the reasons to implement this system, which certainly isn't applicable to 2/3 of your tree), but by their rather arbitrary decision to make that a choice.

It would've been fine and very justifiable, not to mention interesting, if the choice really was about a different version of the skill. But that would mean creating a ton of skills and they didn't do that, so there's just a couple.


---


Quote:
You could get more than ninety percent skills before and more than thirty percent now.
You can get more than 30% now, but only if you don't put much points into them. And then whatever layout you pick will be weaker than it would be if you just didn't get yourself these backup choices.

If you do want to focus on what you find useful, you have 442 points. Initially skills cost 2 SP per level, making it 40 for max level, which means at most you'd get 11 skills, which is around 1/3.
If you go and get the whole 2/3 that's technically available, you'll be able to try different layouts, but all of them will be much weaker than normal.

If planning is to be a thing, you can't dismiss that people will want to play optimally and therefore plan ahead, and that means being focused and closer to the 1/3.

(for easier math, Rune Slayer has 33 skills, 22 of which are in the choices, so yay fractions)