Becoming Too Passive
posted on February 16th, 2010, 7:50 pm
So I like the passives in principle, but one thing I’m not keen on is the fact that they completely muddied the clear delineation created by of the damage reduction of pulses and miss rate of torpedoes. A good example of what I’m talking about is the K’vort, whose pulse weapons should mean it is weak against stations and battleships, but the extra damage it does to medium ranged ships means that it is still very effective against most ships out there, and the weakness of pulses against over half the ships in FO is basically negated. The K’vort is also strong against the dominion basic turret, because the turret receives extra damage from short ranged vessels. 
The current values for passives are also why most battleships are completely useless, and why Romulan battleships in particular are not worth their cost. Why make a really expensive ship if it is cheaper to build a handful of destroyers that can blow that battleship out of the water?
One suggestion I have for passives is that the amount of damage become significantly lowered, and then raised by ship class. So destroyers might only receive a 5% increase in damage due to the passive, cruisers would have a 10% increase, and battleships would have a 15-20% in damage or effectiveness.
Dom was showing me that individual ships get different percentage boosts from passives, so maybe this could be a guideline, but I’m definitely of the belief that less of a boost from passives is better, as some ships (especially those with single stage energy colliders) can be spammed and are super powerful, with a downside that doesn’t seem so down.
This change would help things become more balanced, I believe. It should also make battleships more useful. It seems that every patch, they become less and less cost effective to tech up to and build. Maybe this is one way to bring them back with an edge.
The current values for passives are also why most battleships are completely useless, and why Romulan battleships in particular are not worth their cost. Why make a really expensive ship if it is cheaper to build a handful of destroyers that can blow that battleship out of the water?
One suggestion I have for passives is that the amount of damage become significantly lowered, and then raised by ship class. So destroyers might only receive a 5% increase in damage due to the passive, cruisers would have a 10% increase, and battleships would have a 15-20% in damage or effectiveness.
Dom was showing me that individual ships get different percentage boosts from passives, so maybe this could be a guideline, but I’m definitely of the belief that less of a boost from passives is better, as some ships (especially those with single stage energy colliders) can be spammed and are super powerful, with a downside that doesn’t seem so down.
This change would help things become more balanced, I believe. It should also make battleships more useful. It seems that every patch, they become less and less cost effective to tech up to and build. Maybe this is one way to bring them back with an edge.
posted on February 16th, 2010, 8:44 pm
I'm not sure but I had heard from Dom maybe that the passives were on the to-do as "soft" passives of around 10-20%. Those values are always a better "Soft" percentage as the difference it makes is not always decisive, but gives it a great boost against it's intended target .
Kind of like how the Sensor Blackout got re-adjusted
.
I think even the D'Deridex's Stealth Field could go up to 15 or 20 since it is capped at 8 units affected.
.Kind of like how the Sensor Blackout got re-adjusted
.I think even the D'Deridex's Stealth Field could go up to 15 or 20 since it is capped at 8 units affected.
posted on February 16th, 2010, 8:47 pm
yep, the effectiviness of several passive abilities got slightly reduced for the next patch. We have no problem with several passives being "more important" then the native pulse/torpedo modifiers. The goal was, after all, to open up new possibilities for vessels to receive their own individual character. I think Battleships are a bit underrated at the moment. There are long, short and medium range battleships, just like there are long, short and medium range destroyers. the passives dont favor one of those sectors much. movementspeeds were a problem, so our little kvort will be slower in the next patch 
posted on February 16th, 2010, 10:52 pm
posted on February 17th, 2010, 5:13 am
Yes, the numbers check out, but in practice it doesn't come across the way it's intended. Battleships are getting smoked by destroyers regardless of their passives because they are simply not cost effective. And some ships which should have a weakness of some kind, such as the K'vort and breen cruiser, are now cure alls for every type of situation. 
Instead of ships receiving new possibilities for vessels to receive their own individual character (which I'm all for), many of the defining characteristics for ships have been supplanted. Instead of being good against certain vessels and weak against others, they are now still good against the vessels they were good at before with the native pulse/torpedo modifier. But now they are good against many other vessels, often the vessels they were weak against. Other vessels are no longer good against anything, having lost their advantage to vessels they previously countered.
So instead of more defining characteristics, we have fewer, because even players completely new to the game have instantly picked up that you only make these vessels and skip all those other ones, regardless of the problems with speed. They may be inexperienced, but they're smart. Why pick the crap ship when for example you can have the breen cruiser, which is not a fast vessel, do all the work for you becuase it's good against all ships and REALLY good against mediums.
Instead of ships receiving new possibilities for vessels to receive their own individual character (which I'm all for), many of the defining characteristics for ships have been supplanted. Instead of being good against certain vessels and weak against others, they are now still good against the vessels they were good at before with the native pulse/torpedo modifier. But now they are good against many other vessels, often the vessels they were weak against. Other vessels are no longer good against anything, having lost their advantage to vessels they previously countered.
So instead of more defining characteristics, we have fewer, because even players completely new to the game have instantly picked up that you only make these vessels and skip all those other ones, regardless of the problems with speed. They may be inexperienced, but they're smart. Why pick the crap ship when for example you can have the breen cruiser, which is not a fast vessel, do all the work for you becuase it's good against all ships and REALLY good against mediums.
posted on February 17th, 2010, 10:54 am
posted on February 17th, 2010, 4:23 pm
posted on February 17th, 2010, 4:24 pm
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests