Developers should pay attention to the following two issues

[saikinbyo]

1. The action of the character is very stiff, and the animation shows that it will be delayed when it stops walking. For ARPG, this is very fatal. I hope that the EA stage can pay attention to this issue, because it determines the combat experience of new players.

2. The skill system of the game is very good, but the connection between skills and talents is very small, because I can only allocate talents according to the route specified by the system, and the talent tree lacks some special, obvious and important meaning effects (building the cornerstone) , It probably only has some basic numerical increase. This is the main reason why I feel that the game is boring in the mid-level upgrade phase, because I don’t know that changes in the talent tree can cause obvious changes to certain skills or occupations. In other words, I think the investment in the skill tree is huge and the talent tree, and even make me feel that the talent tree does not have any sense of existence. I hope that talent tree can bring more interesting gameplay, rather than just numerically. Variety.

[Heavy]

Some thoughts on your points:

1. Animnations and “flow” gets worked on constantly and will most certainly get better over time. But some skill are meant to have some animation window, if you don’t invest into attack speed/cast speed

2. Just to rephrase your point: You think the passive tree is boring? (If you refer to the passive tree with “talents”?)

The passive tree does have some nodes that are more than just numeric increases, some class passive trees are definitely or interesting than others, but some of the old classes passive trees are very very old and will get reworked.

Rogue and Spellblade have probably one of the most exciting passive trees.

So i think this “issue” will be come less over time, but i highly advice you to look more deeply into all the passive trees, because there are some “game-changing” passives already.

[Llama8]

He’s talking about the skill trees & their nodes, not the passive tree.

[Gilavar]

He distinguishes those two 'terms ’ -

I think the investment in the skill tree is huge and the talent tree

so I suppose he still means ‘Passive tree’

[Heavy]

@saikinbyo

but the connection between skills and talents is very small

This was made me thought, that he means that the skills (skill spec tree) and the “talents” (probably he means passive tree) are not working together interestingly enough.

I might be mistaken, but his statements are not very clear, since he is not using the correct LE termology

[saikinbyo]

Thank you for your reply.
Yes, you’re right. Maybe my description is not standardized. What I want to talk about is the connection between the skill tree and the passive tree.

[Heavy]

Ok, that’s what i thought.

Just to make sure, i didn’t mean to devalue what you said, i just think there might be more depth and “game-changing” stuff on the passive tree, that you realize on first glance.

There are definitely very many points that are “passive stats” in the most rudamental sense, which is not necessairly a bad thing.

But there are really some truely game-changiing püassives, some classes ahve way more/better ones than others.