Skill tree: Easy way to move passive points

I've waited on making this thread until I could find a good example of it, which (un)fortunately cropped up on my ranger in the 1 month HC league.

Here's the issue: there's no way to apply respec and passive points in one action. This is a major issue when it comes to orphaned nodes. Take for instance this segment of my ranger's passive tree:

Big Image


I've decided I don't need the int nodes after all, which means I no longer need the dex node below them either. I would like to move them like this:



This would be a direct upgrade to my character, but right now it's impossible to do without getting THREE more passive points than I actually need, or using twice as many respec points as it should cost (respec nodes from somewhere else, place to link up, respec the int nodes and dex and put the ones i specced back). It's a nuisance rather than game-breaking but it's a terrible waste of currency for what should be a reasonably simple action.

Right now the process is:

1) Attempt to respec the nodes. The game won't let me because orphaned nodes.
2) Confirm
3) Place nodes where needed
4) Confirm

It would be significantly more manageable if this was the process:

1) Attempt to respec the nodes. The game lets me because it doesn't know where they're going yet. At this point the confirm box would be darkened and wouldn't let you press it.
2) Without hitting confirm, place the passives you've gotten from respeccing into the desired nodes. If the tree is intact again, confirm lights up
3) Confirm


It's just something that really bugs me and could be solved so relatively simply. Please look into it for 2.0 GGG.

EDIT: I realise I only need one additional skill point to make the link, but that's one too many.
Last edited by Hemmingfish on May 27, 2015, 2:46:55 AM
This thread has been automatically archived. Replies are disabled.
"
Hemmingfish wrote:
and could be solved so relatively simply

thats just your opinion.

I assume, that the tree has to be valid at any time, and this also includes tree stages that have unconfirmed changes: the tree's status is still stored.

So, if you want to change your pathing, you have to minimize the gap that have to be closed before you can take out the unneeded part of the old tree, and preferably try to spare some skillpoints in preparation. (some players have dozens of points unspent while leveling just because the build didnt really need them at this stage)

I doubt this will ever change...
invited by timer @ 10.12.2011
--
deutsche Community: www.exiled.eu & ts.exiled.eu
@Hemmingfish

I think you have a point, but that doesn't mean I agree with it.

You selected the path to get those int nodes at the time, now you are the one to pay the cost to repec out of them.

You are right on your options, either you level and save points and put in new path and use regret orbs or passive respec quest to gain those 3 points that are now wasted or you spend the currency to do it now.

IMO its a perfect tradeoff of benefit now pay later type effect. I imagine you probably have at least 1 gem that needed those int points when you were leveling, maybe now you have int on gear or elsewhere, but to say they were wasted and you missed it is your fault, why should they change the design of the game, specifically the tree\regret mechanics in order to cater to your mistake?


Edit: maybe look at it this way as well. People spend significant amounts of currency to respec after they get to a certain level, with your method you are suggesting them not spending additional currency to level as something else only to play another build completely in the endgame?

Best example is like an RF character, typically you level as whatever and when you get to level 70 or so you respec into more life and regen and spec out of damage nodes.

Its for that reason alone something like what you are suggesting will never happen, paired with the fact you already have the option to do it in game, you just have to pay the price.
https://youtu.be/T9kygXtkh10?t=285

FeelsBadMan

Remove MF from POE, make juiced map the new MF.
Last edited by goetzjam on May 27, 2015, 12:30:41 PM
I think you've missed my entire point. The currency here is respec points, either from quests or regret orbs. These should be a straight 1:1 for each point to remove. In order to spec out of those 3 passives I would ideally need 3 respec points. That is the price to be paid for taking those nodes. Arbitrarily taking more than that simply because the game doesn't recognise that I'm going to be using them to retain the link to the rest of the tree is bad design.
"
Hemmingfish wrote:
I think you've missed my entire point. The currency here is respec points, either from quests or regret orbs. These should be a straight 1:1 for each point to remove. In order to spec out of those 3 passives I would ideally need 3 respec points. That is the price to be paid for taking those nodes. Arbitrarily taking more than that simply because the game doesn't recognise that I'm going to be using them to retain the link to the rest of the tree is bad design.


You took those points when you didn't need it only later to discover a better path was available, so if anything the bad design was your original passive skill tree choices.

Under the system you specifically described it opens up the door for abuse in circumstances that shouldn't be allowed. I understand you feel you are paying more in regrets then it would be just to get those points, but it was YOU who decided to path that way in the first place.

How dare you call it a bad design when you made the mistake. At least admit that, then going forward we can discuss how to "fix" your issue.
https://youtu.be/T9kygXtkh10?t=285

FeelsBadMan

Remove MF from POE, make juiced map the new MF.
"
goetzjam wrote:
"
Hemmingfish wrote:
I think you've missed my entire point. The currency here is respec points, either from quests or regret orbs. These should be a straight 1:1 for each point to remove. In order to spec out of those 3 passives I would ideally need 3 respec points. That is the price to be paid for taking those nodes. Arbitrarily taking more than that simply because the game doesn't recognise that I'm going to be using them to retain the link to the rest of the tree is bad design.


You took those points when you didn't need it only later to discover a better path was available, so if anything the bad design was your original passive skill tree choices.

Under the system you specifically described it opens up the door for abuse in circumstances that shouldn't be allowed. I understand you feel you are paying more in regrets then it would be just to get those points, but it was YOU who decided to path that way in the first place.

How dare you call it a bad design when you made the mistake. At least admit that, then going forward we can discuss how to "fix" your issue.


The premise is that I made a mistake. I am paying respec points to remove them. This is what respec points are for. The bad design is that I have to pay more than I should to respec them. I am willing to pay 1:1 point:node. I am not willing to pay 1:1 point:node plus 3 because the system will not correctly handle what I'm trying to do.


I am paying respec points

I am paying respec points

I am paying respec points

I am paying respec points

I am paying respec points

I am paying respec points

To correct my mistake.
"
Hemmingfish wrote:

The premise is that I made a mistake. I am paying respec points to remove them. This is what respec points are for. The bad design is that I have to pay more than I should to respec them. I am willing to pay 1:1 point:node. I am not willing to pay 1:1 point:node plus 3 because the system will not correctly handle what I'm trying to do.

To correct my mistake.



Pay more because you think moving points from one part of the tree to another is only worth = to the amount of points you are reallocating?

I tried to use some logic with you, but for some reason you aren't understanding what I am saying.

If it cost you more then 3 points to repec something that is you fault for not planning appropriately. That isn't the game design being poor or lazy that is you being poor or lazy.


In this specific case you could simply spend 1 extra regret to do what you are wanting to do at the level you currently are, if you leveled once you could save a regret, if you had planned your character differently you could be saving 3.

Please let me make this as clear as I possibly can, what you are asking for is GGG opening up a huge window for exploits because you planned incorrectly for you build. I gave you a specific example of a character that would respec after they reached a level milestone and you just ignore it like i didn't say it.

So i'll list it again in bold until you address it:

People spend significant amounts of currency to respec after they get to a certain level, with your method you are suggesting them not spending additional currency to level as something else only to play another build completely in the endgame?

Best example is like an RF character, typically you level as whatever and when you get to level 70 or so you respec into more life and regen and spec out of damage nodes.


https://youtu.be/T9kygXtkh10?t=285

FeelsBadMan

Remove MF from POE, make juiced map the new MF.
"
goetzjam wrote:
"
Hemmingfish wrote:

The premise is that I made a mistake. I am paying respec points to remove them. This is what respec points are for. The bad design is that I have to pay more than I should to respec them. I am willing to pay 1:1 point:node. I am not willing to pay 1:1 point:node plus 3 because the system will not correctly handle what I'm trying to do.

To correct my mistake.



Pay more because you think moving points from one part of the tree to another is only worth = to the amount of points you are reallocating?

I tried to use some logic with you, but for some reason you aren't understanding what I am saying.

If it cost you more then 3 points to repec something that is you fault for not planning appropriately. That isn't the game design being poor or lazy that is you being poor or lazy.


In this specific case you could simply spend 1 extra regret to do what you are wanting to do at the level you currently are, if you leveled once you could save a regret, if you had planned your character differently you could be saving 3.

Please let me make this as clear as I possibly can, what you are asking for is GGG opening up a huge window for exploits because you planned incorrectly for you build. I gave you a specific example of a character that would respec after they reached a level milestone and you just ignore it like i didn't say it.

So i'll list it again in bold until you address it:

People spend significant amounts of currency to respec after they get to a certain level, with your method you are suggesting them not spending additional currency to level as something else only to play another build completely in the endgame?

Best example is like an RF character, typically you level as whatever and when you get to level 70 or so you respec into more life and regen and spec out of damage nodes.




I'm done, you're not reading what I'm saying. YOu keep yammering on about respeccing whole builds. THIS COSTS RESPEC POINTS.

THIS COSTS RESPEC POINTS.
THIS COSTS RESPEC POINTS.
THIS COSTS RESPEC POINTS.

What I'm proposing is NOT removing respec points. It is allowing you to shift nodes that would otherwise orphan the tree
THIS COSTS RESPEC POINTS.
THIS COSTS RESPEC POINTS.
to somewhere else to rejoin the tree without having to pay additional points for placeholder passives while doing so.


THIS COSTS RESPEC POINTS.

because you missed it

THIS COSTS RESPEC POINTS.
THIS COSTS RESPEC POINTS.


Edit: While I'm not normally one to go back on what I said, the copypaste was a little excessive. Tidied up the post a little bit as the thread gained more responses.
Last edited by Hemmingfish on May 27, 2015, 4:24:12 PM
1) His idea doesn't open up a window for any exploits.
2) His idea is sound and reasonable.
Computer specifications:
Windows 10 Pro x64 | AMD Ryzen 5800X3D | ASUS Crosshair VIII Hero (WiFi) Motherboard | 16GB 3600MHz RAM | MSI Geforce 1070Ti Gamer | Corsair AX 760watt PSU | Samsung 860 Pro 512GB SSD & WD Black FZEX HDD
Last edited by Nicholas_Steel on May 27, 2015, 3:45:57 PM
"
goetzjam wrote:
"
Hemmingfish wrote:
I think you've missed my entire point. The currency here is respec points, either from quests or regret orbs. These should be a straight 1:1 for each point to remove. In order to spec out of those 3 passives I would ideally need 3 respec points. That is the price to be paid for taking those nodes. Arbitrarily taking more than that simply because the game doesn't recognise that I'm going to be using them to retain the link to the rest of the tree is bad design.


You took those points when you didn't need it only later to discover a better path was available, so if anything the bad design was your original passive skill tree choices.

Under the system you specifically described it opens up the door for abuse in circumstances that shouldn't be allowed. I understand you feel you are paying more in regrets then it would be just to get those points, but it was YOU who decided to path that way in the first place.

How dare you call it a bad design when you made the mistake. At least admit that, then going forward we can discuss how to "fix" your issue.


Goetz...saying that his choice is a 'mistake' and that it's entirely on him is a bit overly harsh, don't you think? What about people who start their tree off through a path like that because they need those attributes for gear requirements as first, but then later on get gear down the line that has +Int, +Dex, +Str, or +All Attributes on it and therefore make those nodes redundant? How exactly is that a 'mistake' on the OP's part, or anyone's part for that matter if such circumstances happen? And it's not something that's completely uncommon either, especially as you upgrade gear, or buy something from someone else if you're on the lookout on poe.goods or trade chat/board and stumble across it.

Basically in this case the player is penalized for upgrading their gear and wanting to change a pathway early on, or at some other point in the tree, and that seems a little...not good in my eyes. Or take for example someone starting on the Marauder tree and going down the physical damage node line instead of the life/armour nodes because early on they value the damage more than the life. However, as gear improves and a better weapon is obtained, the person does some calculations and finds that it's better to go for the life/armour nodes because the damage loss isn't a big deal and survival for their particular build is worth more. Example I'm talking about:



It would cost the person 10 total points in that regard to do a respec that should only cost 5 nodes since it's an even exchange and the pathing is not broken or becoming non-functional. There could very well be some technical limitations not allowing this to be sure, as I and I don't think anyone really knows how the tree is coded to work exactly. However, if the path was broken and incomplete when a person wants to make a change, could it not be checked for such an error and thus bring up a warning informing the player that "Your Passive Tree path is incomplete. Please allocate passives to reconnect properly or else all changes will be reverted back to their original state"? And again, the person would still have to spend the respec points to do this either through the ones given in questing, or through Regret Orbs.

You do bring up the idea that this would introduce 'exploits' of sorts, but I am not seeing anything exploitative about it. What specific instances, scenarios, or circumstances would this be allowing exploits to occur if the cost is 1:1 in terms of taking out the points to put them back into the tree once more, but only changing the path to be more efficient or more in line with a person's build as said build and gear grows and evolves?

**EDIT**

Added in url tags for the skill tree links.
Last edited by Tanakeah on May 27, 2015, 3:52:15 PM

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info