Home  | Login  | Register  | Help  | Play 

Passive/Active - Honest assessment

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [EpicDuel] >> EpicDuel General Discussion >> Passive/Active - Honest assessment
Forum Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
6/10/2014 13:38:45   
Predator9657
Member

This is my evaluation of the passive/active change (with as little bias as possible).

First of all, why?

(Dev's said that) passive skill's were taking up too many skill points and had become necessary for almost every build so getting rid of them will increase strategy/diversity (or something along those lines).

(Just a thought, why couldn't they just give everybody an extra 10-20 skill points if they didn't like passives taking 10-20 skill points in every build :P )

From a balance perspective

Balance problems which existed before the change were pretty much unaffected and it is arguable that more balance problems have been caused by too much strain put on EP (since not only ex-passives but now also cores require energy).

The best that can be said about the change in this aspect is that balance hasn't really improved due to it.

From a strategy perspective

The removal of the passives and the strain on energy seem to have reduced a lot of build diversity. I very rarely see builds other than Str/HP or dext spam - I'll admit I almost always play 1v1 (every time I click 2v2 I end up wishing I hadn't) - but I'm pretty sure that the variety isn't much greater in 2v2.

Again, the best that I can say about this aspect is that build diversity hasn't totally been annihilated by it.

Plus, most active replacements are maxed out just as the passives used to be, so it's not really much different now than before.

At this point, I think I should mention that almost everyone will agree that balance and strategy have been good enough before the removal of passives (if not significantly better).

Last but definitely not the least - FUN

We can all unanimously agree that ED is a game and the whole purpose of it is to have fun. Who decides if a game is fun? The dev's or the player-base? (To make it even clearer, who play's the game?)

It's very rare to find someone who will claim that ED without passives is even half as fun as ED with passives.

One thing I (and many others) really liked was the fact that each class had a "unique identity" based on it's passives. Furthermore, each class had quite a few playable builds as opposed to now - it's hard to tell if each class even has 1 playable build each.

To conclude, the removal of passives had very little positive impact on the game (compared with if they had been left) but they took away (diversity/strategy and) a lot of fun.

My honest opinion is that the time spent on that update would have been more wisely invested in giving each class a unique skill tree (i.e removing the repeated skills for balanced equivalents).

But having said that, what's done is done - time cannot be reversed - and I know that dev's don't really "rollback" updates, but I sincerely hope that they find a way to give classes unique "passive" traits - not necessarily linked to the skill tree's but something which has the essence of the passives that we lost (maybe without the bits that dev's didn't like about them) to bring back some more fun and variety into the game.

Hope that didn't end up as a rant :D
But this is how I feel and I found many others who feel similar so I thought that it would be good to post this because - (maybe by some miracle) a dev might end up reading it - or at least we can have a healthy discussion. All I honestly want is this game to be fun enough to continue playing (to make sure all the $'s we invested into it don't end up wasted!)

Anything you agree/disagree with, feel free to post with sufficient explanations and anything I might have missed or overlooked, feel free to add.
Epic  Post #: 1
6/10/2014 14:07:07   
Cyber Dream
Member

The devs do whatever they want, taking away passives was their choice. If they think that it's going to make the game better let them do it...let them suffer from the results.
AQW Epic  Post #: 2
6/10/2014 16:29:04   
Mother1
Member

It wasn't the fact that the passive to active change was bad, it is the fact that Passives had defined the classes.

TLM was the best tanking class
BM was the class that could work best without energy due to it's great offensive powers
TM was and still is the best energy control class

and so on.

Removing the passives for horrid replacements for most as well as the overstress on energy ruined most of the classes. Many predicted that strength builds would take over and they are right due to bad balance changes.

Energy parasite, and Static grenade were also the results of these bad balance changes to fix the strain on energy only to destroy energy destroying build as well as make draining energy in many cases pointless.

While the staff is trying to fix the mess that was made, It is sad to say even with a few good updates the mess keeps getting worse.
Epic  Post #: 3
6/10/2014 17:28:18   
edwardvulture
Member

Personally, I don't find energy parasite or static grenade to be broken individually. I find it broken that they are on the same skill tree as skills that cost energy. I have proposed many times that they need to split the skill tree between cost and no cost skills and bring passives back so that the points for active skills do not take away the points invested in passive skills.
AQ DF MQ  Post #: 4
6/11/2014 1:51:43   
Pemberton
Member
 

Bloodlust and reroute were too strong.
Post #: 5
6/11/2014 2:53:07   
ScarletReaper
Member

yes reroute was strong, but now if you face a mage instead of them gaining a little energy back each turn, they gain a massive amount right before rage so they can then rage overload you. better? Not the way I see it. as for the change from bloodlust to mark of blood, I think that one is actually a good change because bounty hunters were out of control with bloodlust.
DF AQW Epic  Post #: 6
6/11/2014 11:06:53   
suboto
Member

passive armors need to return and support back to control the rage game that is all.
Epic  Post #: 7
6/11/2014 11:06:54   
Predator9657
Member

quote:

Bloodlust and reroute were too strong.


Couldn't a slight tweaking of the % have fixed the balance between the passives?
And it's not like the new actives are balanced to a significantly better level than the old passives.
Epic  Post #: 8
6/11/2014 20:58:44   
One Winged Angel1357
Member


ScarletReaper they gave the glass cannon, Blood Mage, the slowest energy in the game and gave TLM and TM the most powerful energy return in the game

Literally they messed up the whole meaning of the class with that change. If they gave BM Battery Backup while TLM and TM got Energy Parasite then, even though BM had no true energy return before, the classes would have followed the same style as before
AQ DF AQW Epic  Post #: 9
6/12/2014 1:32:16   
suboto
Member

tbh i loved this game more before omega
no 10x
no battery. reroute was a more reasonable use for energy without oh look i can juice up 350energy in 1move.
no energy cost to use a class based armor which should of never of been made to cost.
mages had deadly aim
we actually had advantage for buying var stuff o.o
way to many cores for non var
rage got missed up....
supports worthless now...
jug mode unplayable now...
more then half the player base left....
exiles getting bonus every war...
but on the plus side.
frenzy got buffed
blood shield got buffed
more achievements
more hair styles
ch/bh got a buff on posion

~What needs to happen~
reroute returned with percentages changed
both stun grenades buffed
rage changed to deteremine how much u get per move
jug mode invistigated
hp scale on how much it increases invistigated and rescaled
merc tatical merc and cyber hunter class shield returned to passive set max +100 or something
mark returned to passive
assimilation energy take.regain nerfed on how much it improves by str
atomic smash slightly buffed
static grenade changed to emp since mark is returned or nerfed
reflex boost gains energy back but small small amount
double strike energy cost reduced from +20 per level to +15 per level
^needs to be done. then we can worry with whats below and the other stuff in the near future later

field commander/shadow arts/adreline rush/and i think fire ball <~~~4 worse skills ingame i guess need rework or replaced.
the cores oh boy so much energy taking cores. ! thing that balances that is the cost to use those :D well that needs investigation into that also.
Possiblely multis having the buff of ignore 5% of res or def? or 5% hp regain
class automatic passives bulti into class not skill tree examples:
tlm and merc as u lose hp u gain def/res by 0.03% for example
ch/tm as u lose hp u gain 0.03% energy
bh/bm as u unleash damage u gain 0.03% hp or as u lose hp u gain 0.03% str
i just think a class passive built in would of been alot more cool then a 10x and energy control game with horrible balance
On another note the game should of never went to what its like now balance wise.






< Message edited by suboto -- 6/12/2014 1:51:28 >
Epic  Post #: 10
6/24/2014 2:37:40   
ReconnaisX
Member

Maybe it's just me, but upon checking out EpicDuel today on my old Cyber Hunter and playing for the first time in a year, I was hit pretty hard by the absence of passives. IMO like the original poster said, this seems to have taken out a lot of strategies (IDK about builds, still trying to figure out what is what). Maybe I just can't adapt, or I'm not used to it. That might be the case.
MQ AQW Epic  Post #: 11
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [EpicDuel] >> EpicDuel General Discussion >> Passive/Active - Honest assessment
Jump to:






Icon Legend
New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Forum Content Copyright © 2018 Artix Entertainment, LLC.

"AdventureQuest", "DragonFable", "MechQuest", "EpicDuel", "BattleOn.com", "AdventureQuest Worlds", "Artix Entertainment"
and all game character names are either trademarks or registered trademarks of Artix Entertainment, LLC. All rights are reserved.
PRIVACY POLICY


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition