I think just raising the cap is lazy and unintuitive. I like the idea of having to sacrifice a lot for minimal gains to min/max. Maybe have an epic quest or challenge to give you the chance to give +1 max level to ONE skill. That would be more reasonable to me.
1 Like
Totally agree, that would make more sense.
On the other hand, I like the fact that I can’t “complete” my skills they way I want to. I can’t think of a way in which we get more diversity by having more points to spent. Right now I’m trying Swipe Shaman and I like the fact that I have to choose between crit, flat light, attack speed and AoE. That’s how arpgs should work, min/maxing and making sacrifices. Being able to get everything you need for the type of build you are making, is not good.
1 Like
I’ve done a bit of testing on most classes/skills with trees now - I am also of the opinion that 20 feels a tad short. I’ve sortof been playing with the mindset that 20 was just what was currently available and this was going to increase in the future, by some means at least. Some kind of in-game challenge content or even DLC.
I would be a bit disapointed if this is capped at 20 indefinitely.
EDIT: If it remains at 20, an idea would be some sort of system where we can sacrifice points from skills to increase others.
I think the issue may that you’re seeing a single skill tree as one skill, but rather, you should see a tree as skill variants. There is no reason why you should be able to cover proportionately the same amount of a tree - a larger tree just means more ways to build a skill.
I imagine you find it short because you have a certain path in mind for the tree and wants to “fill it out”. My question is why should that necessarily be the case?
Honestly? Because we want to. It’s a single player/coop ARPG. this isn’t a competitive game, where any of this matters. We want to have fun. We want to feel powerful, and fulfilled with our characters. Since they are apparently going the way of D3 with an online persistant world with other people, most likely they won’t have modding. No one is asking for the ability to max every skill node in a skill tree for every skill. But when your build feels WRONG or incomplete because of an arbitrary skill cap that doesn’t work with every skill, it becomes something you don’t look forward to playing.
And no, leaderboards aren’t competitive. They just highlight whichever exploitable build is there this month.
I never said anything about not having fun. But having your cake and eat it is not always fun. What would you say to someone who says fun is if I can have a character that can completely max out a tree?
2 Likes
Since none of us have said we should be able to max out every skill tree on every skill, and you continue to throw this unsaid desire in our faces, let’s just agree that you are arguing for the sake of arguing and move on. The system as is is not fulfilling. That’s why we are giving our feedback. Feel free to post another thread saying that you would like 1 skill point per skill for that authentic “sacrifice choice” playstyle. See, I can assume what you want even though you haven’t said that too.
Hopefully as time goes by trees will be optimized a bit more. Look at the skeleton tree for example, no matter what you do you are left with the feeling of wanting more.
I’ve already posted my thoughts that limit per skill may be increased. It’s just not a good time now for doing so.
But this words are more interesting …
So, if I’m understanding you correctly, let me rephrase this:
Some trees has low ratio of common node’s amount to amount of key nodes.
If that’s right, than I probably can agree in some cases. But still, it’s a balancing problem, I guess. Size of a tree itself can’t be a real problem. For example: Some time ago I’ve suggested Black Hole and Fire Shield reworks. Both suggested trees have their size about 80-100. But is this a real problem? Every suggested tree has 4-5 ways to advance, and the length of every way is 8-14 nodes with at 1-2 key nodes on it.
But lets return to “Summon skeleton” skill tree and other “large” ones. Yes, it may seem that they have to many common nodes and lack of key ones. But, in my opinion, it’s a problem of balancing and, sometimes, may require partial rework of problematic tree.
1 Like
Keep in mind that this is only my opinion.
I guess the way I feel is that you end up with 5 skills that are all evenly leveled. This means you never really build towards one or two skills, and takes away from the feeling of creating a specific build around one/two powerful skills. This has been the formula for ARPGs for a long long time.
I’m happy to be proven wrong, it’s just that having the skills capped at 20 ‘waters down’ the whole crux of making a ‘build’.
Right now, with max leveled skills, my character build feels like it has not reached it’s potential.
There’s even an argument to be made around the synergy of the talents within the skill trees, and the limit of points hinders reaching some of these synergies.
EDIT: Also, I’m talking about like 25-30 Skill points, rather than 20, and not in every single skill. I firmly believe that some skills should be able to be leveled higher than others at the expense of other skills, there need to be a drawback somewhere.
Thanks for clarifying. I see where you are coming from but I’m more inclined towards @JustLoveHnS perspective which is that this might be a balancing issue.
I mean, in a way, you’re also implying a balancing issue. Just that your solution is to increase the no of skill points per tree. While I’m more inclined to propose compacting the nodes and allow a “full” build to be satisfactorily achieved within 20 points.
I’ll just quote myself from above 
I agree that there are many “meh”-nodes you currently have to pick to get to the ones you want, and those points are missing for synergies you do want in the end. On the other hand, that’s a way of balancing different powerlevels of nodes. When you put 3 points of relatively useless points in front of a really powerful one, the powerful one basically costs you 4 points, so it can increase the power of the skill more than a nodeline of 4 good improvements.
Sudden idea: Would the problem be alleviated somewhat, if skill-changing nodes would be at the start of nodelines, and their upgrades are behind that?
Example Skellies: Your first nodes to pick are “Add Archers”, “Better mages”, “Better warriors”, generic upgrade line for all skelly types. Behind “Add Archers” would be “Only archers” as a side branch, behind better mages “only mages” as side branch etc., thus Nodelines in 4 general directions: Improve Archers, Improve Mages, Improve Warriors, Improve Skellies in general (everwhere can be nodes that also improve/add skellies in general of course).
Idea behind this is, that you can decide early on, what direction your skill should go, and the later nodes are more specific and tweak certain parts here and there.
At the end of each line can be a “big bang” node for the skill (dunno, “mages can also cast meteor”, “warriors take half damage” etc. or something) and your points aren’t enough to get two of them. So either you specialize in one line and have some points left for other upgrades, or you balance it out more.
Don’t know if that would alleviate the feeling of “not getting what I want” 
1 Like
Thank you for this. I don’t know how I missed your original argument but I was basically thinking in line with you. 
I want to come up with some legendary equipment to give skill levels + 2, +3 or that skill core talent.
Could you imagine a maxed out Meteor tree? It’s bad enough with a level 20 cap.
Well if they are going to adjust the skill level cap then they will also have to do a balance passover of all the skills.
I doubt any numbers related to skill points are even near being finalized, especially considering many skills still do not yet have passive trees. Having said that I do feel like I’m a bit short of points towards having a complete build with my Reaper. But back to my first point having a “complete build” should be treated in the context of we’re in beta. Admittedly its open beta, so I agree this feedback is needed.
Edit:
If you were to tell me that Primalist’s Swipe and Acolyte’s Harvest were both in their final state i would say that:
- I’m making some very hard choices such as living with Swipe’s tiny AoE in return for damage, and trading ward generation for AoE with Harvest (Harvest’s AoE is already huge and should probably be nerfed though so you don’t really need the AoE from the nodes).
However I think this is a great design choice. In some games the main player decision when coming up with a build is: what is your damage type? I’m in favor of making even more fine grained decisions like those I mentioned with Swipe and Harvest. I think this is a result of the branching nodes in the active skill’s trees. In the future I hope to see even more branching so that there are different branches to take within a branch.
- Some of the nodes feel like they require too many points (those 8 and 10 pointers), but then again you don’t have to fill those nodes up either but OCD tells me I should. Maybe that is a good thing after all as it allows a place for other builds to dump some extra points.
2 Likes
25 would definitely be nice as it will let people pick nodes that no one does, “because they don’t increase damage”.
Damage nodes take way too many points, like 8/8 on warpath 2H leaving absolutely no choice in variation besides a few points here and there.
- 25 points or
- Damage nodes removed/decreased/built in to the skill depending on 1H or 2H as they become mandatory and you don’t really have 20 points to spend on cool things or changing the skill as the points mostly go in passive damage% increases
This doesn’t apply to all the skills like support skills, but for main damaging abilities I have seen this trend
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.