Super Melee Passives

Obviously I like this idea although I didn't envision the damage buff being a hard number. It would work more like a percentage buff.

I like the idea of having extra diversity via passive abilities, but I'm not sure having it tied to the survivability of a single ship is going to be much fun. I think this will likely mean that there will be a ship in your fleet that's just going to sit there because its tied passive ability is too powerful to give up. Some ships are also cheaper than others, so to balance that you're going to have to make their passive abilities less powerful, which keeps them rather disposable still.

I think some sort of "race allegiance" would work better. So you have your fleet of ships manufactured by multiple alien species, but this fleet belongs to someone, right? Imagine the same fleet under different allegiance. Why wouldn't the Humans or Scryve make a small modification to ships under their control?

So for example, if we're talking about a fleet that belongs to the Mowlings, you could have a small chance of summoning a mini Jeff (just a shitty idea, could be anything else) no matter what fleet ship is used. But if the same fleet is controlled by The Measured, every ship has been upgraded with ramming plates that deal a small amount of damage when bumping into enemy ships (another crappy idea).

This way, you don't feel like there's a grounded ship that's just there for its passive utility, and the passive ability is granted by a race - rather than one of its ships - which makes more sense to me.

Also, instead of having a Human vs. Cyborg fights, we could have MuKay vs. Scryve

What are your thoughts?

I was thinking maybe passive abilities should only be active once you have enough ships.  Like for instance if your fleet is limited to 12 ships,  then if you have 3 ships of the same kind, you'd get a passive ability.  That way you can have only a max of 4 passive abilities instead of 12.  

You can go further and have 2 passive abilities combine if 2 alien races "love" each other into a synergy passive ability. 

Also if you have alien ships that don't like you, there should be a negative passive.

edit: what would also be fun, is if you have 2 or more negative passives your fleet mutinies then you have to fight your hateful aliens

Btw I am tomdust, for some reason the forum decided to "split" me when I updated my settings in the stardock account thingy

edit: seems like it updated or something, don't mean to double-post/spam or something. Feel free to delete this one

Instead of just using game terminology they could use real-world military terminology for variants.  Just saying "passives" reminds the player that it is a game.  So the Scryve example could be a "Leader" variant.  A smaller ship might be an EW (electronic warfare) variant and provide some form of defensive bonus.  They should come up with an appropriate sounding variant name for each passive support ability, and not just call it "passives". 

Also, the mothership is the "flagship".  You could instead say that the ships operate in pairs, with the second ship being "off-map", at the edge of the map, providing whatever support it does to the ship that is in the fight without actually being in the fight.  So you would pick the attacking ship and the support ship for every fight.  The attacking ship is in the fight, and the support ship is actually just giving a bonus to the attacking ship without ever appearing in the fight.  This seems like something for the full game that wouldn't be available in Supermelee.

I can see where you are coming from Gildon. It would be likely that the selected flagship is kept until the end - but that is a choice by the player and effectively gives them one less ship earlier in the fight. Once the Melee has begun the flagship for each player needs to be revealed - opponents then might try tactics to draw the flagship into combat. That of course is not effective if they have another vessel of the same type in the line up - should there be a restriction on no duplicates of the flagship type? A bit of an arbitrary restriction, I don't have a good justification for it.

I don't mind the race allegiance concept either. If we followed this mechanic I'd suggest that it looks at providing effects to either a subset of races (pseudo-allies, maybe grouped good, neutral, bad) or perhaps to particular weapon type or ship type groupings (e.g. energy weapons could consume less energy, projectiles became flaming for burn damage, organic ships get faster). Limiting the extent of coverage for the passive ability would then likely influence the player's ship selection.

There should definitely be a point cost for raising a ship to flagship status (or race selection).

 I like Gildon's idea of it being race specific added into this, too.  So you get a bonus for having a "wingman" and carrying two of one type of ship.  This also helps with balance as only the same species ships get the "wingman bonus".  So you don't need to worry about the Scyrve bonus being too powerful when applied to the humans, for example.  It also allows you to make up for deficiencies of a ship/species.  So maybe the Human ship alone has a lot of difficulty defeating The Measured, but the wingman bonus makes it a more even fight.

So here's the thing: this system is already confirmed to be in place in one form or another in the single player campaign. The point of this isn't to discuss that, because the devs are already working on that. The point is that the chat ended with a unanimous desire to include this system in Super Melee. Why?

Because as it stands right now, Super Melee will not hold most players' attention for longer than a few months post release. It needs elements of strategy crafted that will make the game interesting beyond simply choosing ships for active abilities. Actives, passives, Leadership abilities, the name is currently unimportant. What's important is that the mechanic be made to work and to be made to be fun. Ideally, the addition of passive abilities will encourage more deliberate fleet compositions. As it stands, 100 points versus 100 points is already working fairly well to do this.

As much as I'd like these passives to add buffs with percentages, the fact of the matter is that we're dealing with very small numbers in Star Control (less than 100). I mean, sure, the system can round, and if it works, it works, just do it. However, I believe that adding raw numbers will lead to easier moddability, which is another hard-goal of the new Star Control.

Two things, a thought on SuperMelee and then passive. I'll address the first one in this post. And follow up with passives thereafter.

Somewhat unrelated, but I agree with the assessment that gaming now is not gaming back in StarControl 2 days.  I think the core of the issue is that as a 1v1 game it is not complex enough to have lasting appeal. Ideally you'd want SC:O SuperMelee to be picked up as a professional esport. For that to happen there needs to be both audience appeal as well as a deep enough gaming experience. 1v1 games that made that are things like Quake, and beat-em-ups.

I don't think sprucing up SuperMelee with more abilities or (heaven forbid) key-combos is the way to go. Nor can I picture SuperMelee achieving a first-person-shooter environment and twitch reflexes coupled with nauseating speed.

The crux of it is that thinking of SuperMelee only in terms of a 1v1 experience is just not enough. If you picture it as a team game  then suddenly the depth and strategy can explode. Ship abilities can take on completely new dimensions. In a 1v1 the idea of a "support" ship is meaningless. And a glass cannon is viable, but not really something that you want to play with against a skilled player in 1v1. But in a team where you have a supporting class, a tanking class, and more... suddenly you've got peoples attention.

There is probably a way to enable support for both in modding. I just think that percentage attribute changes would work better for balancing as well as for feedback to the player. Saying "10% extra hitpoints" is better than "Add +3 to ship HP" and prevents things like deliberately weak ships getting an insane buff to HP. It is up to the devs to implement it though, the basic mechanical idea remains the same.

@Kavik if you want to know the context of this you should join the Discord and download the recording of our Q&A session.

Secondly, I've got some thoughts on passives. In the early forum days I've posted in favor of the idea of having something like "ship captains" (heroes) that can add a passive bonus to a ship (or in this case fleet). Changing a captain on a ship can change the ship's strategy. I think there is value in the line of thought that is being pursued in this thread.

Passive ideas:

Triage
A strict emphasis on cutting losses and using resources to save those most likely to survive first and foremost.
Effect: when taking damage, the crew lost is regenerated if no additional damage is taken within 6 seconds

No One Left Behind
Every effort is made to save crew that were engaged in previous encounters.
Effect: after a ship is lost, the next encounter (within the same battle) has the starting crew increased by 10 as survivors are salvaged from the debris.

Quantum Acceleration
When cruising with a stable energy load, ship systems can run at higher efficiency.
Effect: while energy bar is at 100% ability cooldown is reduced by 50%

Stifling Lock
Deep insights into structural integrity and stresses allow for exploitative targeting.
Effect: when damaging an enemy ship, the enemy ship additionally loses 6 energy

Merzer Doctrine
Anything goes and the engineers can clean up the mess afterward.
Effect: all ability ranges are increased 100% - but damage is reduced by 20%

Abrasive Overload
Successive salvos of attacks can progressively erode defensive counter-measures.
Effect: each time the enemy ship is damaged, the damage is increased by 1 (0 bonus initially, then +1, then +2, and so forth up to +6). The bonus damage resets to 0 if the enemy ship does not take damage for 10 seconds

Suppressive Fire
Fleet firing strategy can be coordinated to minimize the chance of enemy counter attacks.
Effect: when damaging an enemy ship, the energy cost for its abilities is doubled for 4 seconds

Close Combat Optimization
Specializing in imminent range exchanges allows for significantly altered firing protocols.
Effect: increases damage dealt to enemy ships by 8, but only when enemy ship is within X (short distance) units

Rainbow World Alliance
Diversifying can yield significant system improvement if the resources are properly leveraged.
Effect: increase all ship parameters (speed, acceleration, turn-rate, firing rate, damage, etc) by 2% for each different type of ship in the fleet (determined at start of battle)

Synced Phase Shift
Normally a fleet cannot operate cohesively using phase shifting technology; quantum-synced phase shifts overcome this limitation.
Effect: there is a 25% chance that any damage or debuff received is ignored

I'd like to say that i really don't like the passives idea that much. i find it too tactical for StarControl.
Super Melee needs to be more about the fun action than it is about tactics. passives don't add anything to that. they are too "serious" if you will.

I would like to advocate (if at all) the addition of "ultimates".
it can be just a strong form of the secondary ability, so wouldn't need an extra key (if that's a problem) or it can be another ability altogether.

passives are somewhat boring really... too tactical for Star Control. give me explosions! give me action!

also... it really makes more sense when you think about the mothership in the single player game, as passives are really more suitable as an RPG character upgrade than it is suitable for SM.

bottom line:
I say NO to PASSIVES

I'd like to say that I think adding "+2 damage" based on your fleet's chosen ship, is a mistake. Star Control has never been about numbers. It's been about IDEAS. You never even had a set damage amount for ANY of your weapons (because that's ludicrous, anyway - does the new U.S. fighter jet do 78dmg to enemy armor? Does the M16 now do 376dmg to enemy flesh? Ridiculous. No.) 

As I've said before 20million times, I don't WANT incremental weapons-upgrades. I don't want to go to a planet and see a gun floating there like a DOOM health pod, for no reason that happens to be Gauss Cannon Mk III, and mine is only an Mk II.

Those have a place in some games, like Diablo and its ilk. But not in Star Control. I want to go to a planet and there be a crashed ship there, and you discover it and at the very least, get a little backstory on what the heck happened and why it's there, and then ensign Robertson accidentally discharges his blaster and the cannon falls off and we find a way to attach it to our ship. And it shoots a double burst photon, instead of a single gauss shot. And the upgrade is that most point defense systems can shoot the first burst of photon, but the second one will get through. This is function over +11 dmg upgrade.

Now, going back to the point - I want to propose a slightly altered take to this idea, that I think would workable within the spirit of Star Control. Still a great idea, Vol, and I like its implications, but what if we see it tweaked so that the upgrade, instead of being the relatively boring +2dmg... what if the passive upgrade is FUNCTIONAL?

For example, if the Syreen were your fleet leader (or conversely, you added a Syreen nose to your flagship), there would be a CHANCE that each direct hit would cause some of the enemy's crew to jump overboard and come aboard your ship. A Mycon leader would maybe cause your projectiles to have a spore cloud integrated into them, and stick around and follow the enemy, but dissipate their power the longer it follows them. A Scryve leader maybe makes your ship unable to move when it fires whatever weapon you have of choice, but you use their tech to divert the power from the turning jets into a sizable damage upgrade. Make sense? 

Something unique and fun that it adds, affecting your strategy and how you play. I just read HenriHakl's post, and I'd argue along those lines - some strategic difference for your ship, as opposed to just +5 dmg.

Cuore, the raw numbers were just an example. I wasn't seriously suggesting adding boring stat increments.

As for my personal suggestions (the actual numbers don't matter at this point):

Mu'kay: Your fleet deals double damage when within melee range (that is to say less than a quarter of your weapon's range)

Trandals: Your fleet moves faster after taking damage.

Earthling: Your fleet's primary weapons have a chance of gaining a TINY bit of tracking every time it is fired. (Beams cannot benefit from this)

Tywom: Your primary weapon explodes at the apex of its range.

Mowlings: Using your secondary weapon has a chance of summoning Jeff for a single shot, and then he phases out. "Whoops, wrong patsy."

Drenkend: Your fleet's primary weapons have a chance to apply the Drenkend slowing effect.

Dan'nath: damage dealt near gravity wells inflicts a short, low-damage DOT effect on your target.

MenkMank: There's a very small chance that destroying an enemy will summon another ship from your fleet as an ally, but this ship is inflicted with the same dumb AI that current Menkmank allies have.

These are just stirring the pot a bit. I think we need something LIKE this, but not exactly this. The system should be complex enough that 100+ hours of Super Melee should still have fresh and exciting encounters, without sacrificing Star Control's arcadey nature.

Addendum: I know that narrative has to be supported by mechanics and vice versa, but just look at this system by itself FIRST. Make this work, make it look good, then make it fit narrative. Then make it part of the whole. You have to see the forest through the trees, yes, but you have to have a functioning tree before you can have a forest.

Cuore, well, if SC2 is the prime example of a Star Control game then most upgrades there were incremental, arguably not incremental enough.. there's nothing inherently wrong with that.

That being said, i do agree that finding cool stuff that fundamentally change the nature of the module/ship is a lot more exciting, but that has to be more rare or it'll get old.. especially if/when you settle on a build you like.

Another problem with passives is they go against the uniqueness of the ships. adding more abilities should go with the uniqueness and not against... (if they are going to happen, then definitely I'd take more functional ones over just stats upgrades)

examples: consider the pkunk's hallelujah, the slylandro's energize, and the shofixti's bomb as possible "passive" abilities that can be applied to existing ships. 

- a ship that explodes when it dies

- a ship that has a chance of revival

- a ship that has a chance of regaining full energy when passing next to an asteroid or the planet

These "passives" can be tailored to specific ships, keeping uniqueness and enhancing fun. 
(well these can also be used as proper fleet wide passives.. if that is the way it's gonna go..)

like

like, but i'd say adding ships that are inherently "enemies"

i think these ideas could make the fleet-wide passives more interesting and complex (again, if decided to go that route...)

This is a good point, and to be honest, I'm struggling with the idea of passives already. I think it adds yet another layer of balancing that doesn't necessarily NEED to be in the game. I mean, ffs, as of right now there are 5 critter models TOTAL, in the game. Make that number = 20, and then we'll talk about the delicate act of balancing something that increases the balancing needed on tight, action-based ship fighting 10-fold.

SC:O2?

SC1 had artifacts in its strategy mode. And it pretty much buffed the ships.

The thing is, scope wouldn't be increased by adding these passives, because the system is already in place in the game in a way (there's modules you can equip that will do basically the same thing for your fleet/ship), it's just currently for the single player campaign only.

Forget that dirty word, scope, it would be an absolute nightmare to balance! Because to truly balance, you need to make 15 ships that can fight against each other and have a chance, right? But then... 15 variations of each ship? You're now looking at 240 ships (including unaltered ships), that have to somehow be balanced against each other. I don't know. The whole things seems like it'd be terrifying to have 240 states of ships that can somehow fight each other in meaningful ways... doesn't a game like overwatch, or Hearthstone or I know for a fact WoW, constantly go through a million cycles of buffing and nerfing of the different abilities? This is like that. I think.

we'll be the ones working out the balance pretty much... anyway... we don't even have all the ships yet in SM so I'd like to see what we have work well first, then start worrying about passives. 

I'm also worried that indeed as Cuore said, passives might have to be nerfed, which will make them well, boring.

Nerf them, buff them. That's a realistic modern development cycle now. Anyone who thinks they'll be 100% perfect out of the box are kidding themselves now (and don't try to say games were perfect out of the box 5, 10, 15 years ago. Games were notorious for having shipped bugs that players just dealt with; we didn't have the luxury of being able to regularly patch games like we do now). You'll never get a better test group than your players, because they'll think of tactics and strategies you didn't to test.

Also, keep in mind that the buff/nerf cycle is a continuous process because the actual meta-game evolves even within an otherwise perfectly balanced game.

To build a little bit on what Ishaan0001  said earlier, I think that there should certainly be the ability to add in passives in the core ship creation module, with enough design freedom for people who add in ships to make them do..well, whatever (of course there are balance concerns, but let's face it, someone will design a literal 'I win' ship within 3 minutes of installing the game in any case).

A full featured functional passive system should just be an open ended series of buffs/effects/even things that automagically shoot/move/teleport (basically almost anything) for ship design, with the usual flags for player-made ships.  Things like teleports instead of dying if the other ship dies within 1 second of it's death, or a syreen life leech type effect, could be interesting if used properly (and balanced).  Another thought would be a passive/active system that lets you rewind your personal timeline/space for 5 seconds, which could be interesting.

It's not really a feature I strongly want to see used in the base game, though I concede for storyline reasons there could well be a good use case for it.