Points spent per tree - suggestion

[mezzorco]

Hi devies.

So, nowadays there's a "per tree" requirement on points spent in order to pick high tiered enhancements.
We asked about removing the "per tree" restriction, making it "points spent in total", but seemingly you devs don't like the idea.
Meanwhile, we now can put enhancements in 7 trees instead of 4. As you can see, we have too few points to make a real use of this change, and "per tree" restriction doesn't help. Who is going to use more than 4 trees?

My suggestion is to make it a "points spent per class" kind of restriction, unlocking higher tiers of all trees of a given class based on all points spent in all trees of that class. This way, we could benefit from multiclassing while still focusing on a single class.
If you think this would be too light, you can raise number of points required, maintaining the "per class" split.

Something different should be done for race trees. In such a scenario, the most suitable solution would be giving them a "points spent in total" restriction, essentially making them limited only by character level (the same as now on live). Obviously i'm not talking of a 0/5/10/20 requirement like it is now, this should be raised.

I hope this helps you find a balancing system. Regards.

[blackdae]

I totally agree with this proposal..

[HastyPudding]

That might work. Sort of like:

Tier 5 Ability costs 2 Ap to get, but requires 20 AP spent in the PrE tree OR 30 total AP spent in all trees of that class. Obviously, it should be easier to get an ability in a tree provided you've spent a lot of AP in that particular tree.

Not likely to happen, but it has possibilities.

[barecm]

I agree 100% with this. I was noticing the same things as the OP. In particular, the stat point abilities are a LOT more costly to obtain considering that the new system has 2 per tree and the old system offered both a racial AND a class path for a total of 5 with only char level as a restriction. Making a cumulative requirement makes more sense especially now that they have added trees. Same amount of ehancement points with more trees limits what you can do. I would follow the OPs suggestion to remove the per tree restriction as is it makes little sense now that there are more trees available.

[Chette]

This will fix so many of the problems with the current enhancement layout. Unfortunately I'm fairly sure many players begged for this in the first preview and there was no response.

The devs claim that they have implemented these enhancement changes because they want players to have more choice and more versatility, but they have done the exact opposite. With the "points spent per tree" requirement they are essentially forcing players to specialize in one of two or three pre-selected options. They might as well start forcing players to pick one of the terribly designed "paths". If players are not free to pick and choose the enhancements that will fit their build from different trees, without having to buy dozens of points worth of worthless abilities, it will absolutely destroy the diversity of builds we currently have.

[Iriale]

We need class trees. Enhancements needed for a class are spread in several trees. And then tier 5 inaccessible in more than one tree, blocking skills that my character needs because they are randomly distributed in different trees.

This and “points spend per tree” are the major problems of this system.

[Wanesa]

We need class trees. Enhancements needed for a class are spread in several trees. And then tier 5 inaccessible in more than one tree, blocking skills that my character needs because they are randomly distributed in different trees.

This and “points spend per tree” are the major problems of this system.

/signed, but I don't believe that they will hear us out. Current state on Lam. is WAI. Turbine wants to have everyone locked in his choosen tree or suffer some penalty making his toon more general. There will be no more signle and only correct way, how to build your toon.

Like a multiclassing. In other words, new enhancements are something like a subclassing with the multisubclassing feature and with all pros and cons arising from it.

[mezzorco]

/signed, but I don't believe that they will hear us out. Current state on Lam. is WAI. Turbine wants to have everyone locked in his choosen tree or suffer some penalty making his toon more general. There will be no more signle and only correct way, how to build your toon.

Like a multiclassing. In other words, new enhancements are something like a subclassing with the multisubclassing feature and with all pros and cons arising from it.

Sure but why on earth they allowed us to use up to 7 trees then? With such restrictions i can't even make a use of 4 trees, let alone 7!
What devs are doing is contradicting their own decision.
80 ap, 7 trees. Let's say i want tier 5 in one tree, so it's 40 points plus 2 for each enhancement of that tier. So approximately 42, i've 38 points left, at best. They're too few to be effectively used on more than two additional trees, basically all that i can do is to use 3 trees out of 7.
So devs, why bothering to give us 7 trees if you don't allow us to minimally use them?

[Ironclans_evil_twin]

Why the change to 7 trees? Well when you want to tell the community "we listened" but you also don't want to actually add the "as live" flexibility of choices back in, and want to make sure everyone is pigeonholed into more easilly monitored/balanced "paths" you add useless stuff. Like 7 tree access when you wont have the AP's to reach even a 3rd tier in a third tree let alone 4th 5th 6th or 7th.

The next "we listened" change will be lowering AP costs across the board... and as "a balance" increasing the class level requirement per tier.

They are replacing a flexible, well balanced, and nicely tuned system that has a bad UI, with a new nicer UI and system that is far more restrictive of how you spend AP's.

[ArcaneArcher52689]

Hi devies.

So, nowadays there's a "per tree" requirement on points spent in order to pick high tiered enhancements.
We asked about removing the "per tree" restriction, making it "points spent in total", but seemingly you devs don't like the idea.
Meanwhile, we now can put enhancements in 7 trees instead of 4. As you can see, we have too few points to make a real use of this change, and "per tree" restriction doesn't help. Who is going to use more than 4 trees?

My suggestion is to make it a "points spent per class" kind of restriction, unlocking higher tiers of all trees of a given class based on all points spent in all trees of that class. This way, we could benefit from multiclassing while still focusing on a single class.
If you think this would be too light, you can raise number of points required, maintaining the "per class" split.

Something different should be done for race trees. In such a scenario, the most suitable solution would be giving them a "points spent in total" restriction, essentially making them limited only by character level (the same as now on live). Obviously i'm not talking of a 0/5/10/20 requirement like it is now, this should be raised.

I hope this helps you find a balancing system. Regards.

While i disagree with a total points spent system, I think this Points-per-class system has merit.
The biggest drawback to a total points spent system is that with a plethora of options, one loses CHOICE. If you don't have to make choices, you encourage cookie cutter builds and lose diversity.

However, a points per class system could function pretty well, but the point costs would have to go back to their original values, i think. I had been thinking they should do something similar for the core-abilities anyways. As for racial trees, i would then keep them as they are now, but allow points spent in the racial tree to tie in with any points spent in racial-PRE's.

[mezzorco]

While i disagree with a total points spent system, I think this Points-per-class system has merit.
The biggest drawback to a total points spent system is that with a plethora of options, one loses CHOICE. If you don't have to make choices, you encourage cookie cutter builds and lose diversity.

However, a points per class system could function pretty well, but the point costs would have to go back to their original values, i think. I had been thinking they should do something similar for the core-abilities anyways. As for racial trees, i would then keep them as they are now, but allow points spent in the racial tree to tie in with any points spent in racial-PRE's.

Thank you, your opinion is much appreciated

[Jay203]

While i disagree with a total points spent system, I think this Points-per-class system has merit.
The biggest drawback to a total points spent system is that with a plethora of options, one loses CHOICE. If you don't have to make choices, you encourage cookie cutter builds and lose diversity.

However, a points per class system could function pretty well, but the point costs would have to go back to their original values, i think. I had been thinking they should do something similar for the core-abilities anyways. As for racial trees, i would then keep them as they are now, but allow points spent in the racial tree to tie in with any points spent in racial-PRE's.

i disagree with your fear of losing diversity from having a total point spent system
imo, the fundamental base of the enhancement system should be lenient and not very limiting. The limit of the enhancements should come from the level split more than how much AP you've spent in specific tree. That's not to say that there shouldn't be some sort of requirement which forces you to spent specific amount of APs in a specific tree.

atm we have 2 category of enhancements in this new system, the "tree" and the "core"
if the core requires specific character levels as well as # of APs spent in that specific tree while the tree only requires you to spend specific amount of APs total but have some of the higher tier/more powerful ones requiring a specific core enhancement, that should be plenty enough to force choices.
the only problem is in balancing the power of the tree against the core so the players will WANT the cores.
a player should be allowed to take nothing but tree should they choose to ignore the core. since some of the tree enhancements will require some core, they have to make the choice of investing in that tree enough as well as enough character levels to obtain the core before getting that tree enhancement

hope that made sense o_O

[Starla70]

Something needs to be done. From what I have seen, I can not get a toon to the same power levels I had before the trees came to be. More points? Less restrictions?

This idea has merit at least.