EVE General Discussion

Hello again...

Well, first off, thanks for the data and relic sites info. A little solo gallivanting around will do me well.

Secondly, I entitled this thread "First impressions of a total newbie..." for a reason. I would, of course, expect people to take my limited experience into account when examining my comments, and to take those comments with a grain of salt.

Now, as for people's comments on my comments on the Webifier. Well, I'm sorry but I just don't see the point of that particular module for the following reasons...

1. Webifiers have a limited range (10k if I'm not mistaken) which means that faster ships can still maintain range on the slower ones. So, the only purpose of the webifier would be in close quarter combat, where it successfully turns cool looking and fast maneuvering ships into motionless blobs rolling around in some kind of a pudding-like substance. To me it seems that Webifiers are only there to help the bigger ships slow down frigates that are silly enough to close within 10k range so that they're easier to hit with those big and slow tracking guns. Better solution? POINT DEFENSE TURRETS!

2. I don't really see the validity of the BBs (the correct term for battleship instead of BS - lol) having to use a World of Warcraft kind of spell in order to balance themselves out against the speed and maneuverability of smaller craft. In my opinion BBs should balance out against faster craft in some other way (it could even be drones instead of point defense missiles/turrets).

3. I don't see frigates having a module that could nullify the BB's advantage in shields and firepower via some silly "Remover of Shields and Firepower I." module.

And for the record, I have no problems with scramblers because they actually make sense and don't look silly.

Now, as for my opinion on the combat system, perhaps it was a bit bare.

There are many good things about the current system. I like the fact that there are different weapons that deal different types of damage, and that shields/armor works in a similar way. And the wide range of equipment that let's the player choose between say better sensors or boosted shield regeneration certainly has a lot of depth all by itself.

With that said, I really don't like the fact that a cruiser that has just taken 800 railgun hits in the face, and has had most of its internal structure destroyed, still operates on the same level as an undamaged cruiser, meaning it has the same speed and maneuverability, and fully functional guns. There should be some sort of a penalty on the ship's performance when it has suffered such extensive damage.

Also, I dislike the fact that ships can fully repair any amount of damage done to their structure/armor/shields whilst in space.

Right now we have white blocks to signify undamaged structure and red ones to signify damaged ones. I would also like to see black blocks to represent destroyed structure, one that cannot be repaired in space but only in dry dock.

Again, these are only thoughts emanating from one newbie's potentially damaged brain...

Grains of salt people, grains of salt...

'newbie'

Zappity did you overheat?? And remember to reload nanite paste bro I messed up the other day

And don't forget to disable auto-reload on your SAAR after reshipping (lost 2 ships to this mistake).

That damn AAR. It'll be the death of me!

This could become a problem ...

BTW, FRAPS is a tool to record screen captures allowing you to analyze your fights later.

Seriously, join RvB and get into some fights. It will change your game completely.

We are.



Not all webs have a 10k range. And some ships have bonuses (and you can receive bonuses via other means, such as links) for even longer ranges.

Which is moot. The (main but not only) point of webs is to keep a ship from simply ignoring warp disruption by flying out of warp disruption range. Without Webs, EVE would turn into "zoomy Zoomy mcfastships online" and nothing that could not escape warp disrupt range (or area in the case of interdiction probes aka bubbles) would be viable at all. Webs and other such things are 'necassary evils' that that allow game play.

"Point defense turretns" are likewise a bad idea, because all EVE players would do is blob up , dive into an enemy blob and turn those 'point defense turrets' into "improved smartbombs" aka an offensive weapon.



To put this civilly , you don't know enough yet about EVE (and it's players, and it's pvp, which is at the core of it's blanace) to even form an opinion and yet you have. This is your flaw here, the fix for that is to post less and learn more.




This demonstrates thinking flaw number 2. EVE BSs aren't "BBs". Just because they share a name with something outside the game means nothing (in the same vain, our 'logistics ships' don't do logistics lol). EVE battleships are SUB-Capital ships.

And webs don't exist to balance out battleships with smaller ships. Again they exist as they do because without them EVE combat balance wouldn't exist.

Another mistake is that you are thinking in 'solo' terms, EVE players take things balanced for Solo and turn them into offensive blob weapons.


We ARE taking what you say with a grain of salt, but we are also identifying why your thinking about this stuff is , tbh, really bad, and some of it has less to do with being new and more to do with not being open minded enough about the "EVE approach to gaming" to understand why it works like it does.

You aren't alone, their are legions of actual veteran EVE players who think the same way (like the "remove gates" types lol, the "Battleships should be solo pwn mobiles" types also). They're problem tends to be that they can't see the forest for the tress and thus don't see how things mesh together in this insanely complex world of New Eden

Others have responded in more detail but overall:
Gameplay overrides physics in EvE.
The game is very much science Fiction

Hey OP.

Welcome to Super Serious Spaceships!

Yes, you're bang on with the very shallow depths of the actual combat mechanics, however you need to understand that they are built this way as the computation to arrive at the "you [did| took] 999 Damage" is actually wildly different between parties based on a number of variables. I'm going to 'simplify' for you. I'm sure my peers will correct / fill in the missing stuffs

1) Pilots skills (2nd level: support skills)
2) Ships fit (2nd level: Modules meta values, active / passive)
3) Ships orientation / motion (2nd level tracking / speed)
4) Signature of gun vs Signature of target
5) Distances between two parties (range / optimal, falloff)
6) Guns stats (Tracking) and ammo used
7) Bonuses from fleet ship
8) State of Squad commander / Wing commander / FC (If not in a ship, you lose all bonuses at some level)
... other things I'm sure I've forgotten (like wormholes for example) and I won't even start with "pilot nerves".

After computing all of this for 'every individual player' (perhaps 1,000+ times), what exactly do you think there's room to add in the way of 'depth'?

I like what you are saying about the deflector shields etc, however this IS in the game already.

All in all, it's pretty darned deep. You can never take in all variables. Only make good guesses and cover your ass by bringing more people (always works tbh).