Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I tend to disagree. If you don't like random damage then use missiles. It makes the game much more thrilling that you can not always calculate the damage you recieve. Just think about frigates orbiting a larger ship. If you always would just get 1 dps then you could easily tank it in all cases. Currently you will recieve 0 dps almost all the time but there is the chance of 1% that you get hit with a precision hit which results in 3 x damage of the gun which usually pops a small frig. This is what make the thrill in the game and it should stay as it is.

Hmm a bit of yes and no in here for me. Yes if you are not moving and the target isn't moving you should probably do full damage all the time. And I've noticed that for the most part I the deviation being so small that it doesn't make that much of a difference.

But I do like the "lucky shot" thing on smaller ships. Now let's be honest a battleship shooting at a frigate is going to make this shot once in a blue moon. In fact I've found that this happens when the frigate is changing direction and it's transversal drops and the battleship and or larger gun mount fires when the frigate is at a low transversal. For the most part when you do hit them it's a glancing blow and does a pathetic amount of damage.

I just think that the formula needs to be tweaked somewhat, since it was made pre-speed nerf. Could be why Hybrids suck so much. But that is another thread.

When the frig makes a hard turn and transversal drops, it's not random. You're supposed to score a big hit. The pilot has no one but himself to blame for turning off prop/getting webbed/whatever else caused the hard break & turn.

If you want that feeling, earn it through doing something that causes your opponent to drop his transversal; dont rely on luck to get you out of a bad situation.

The entire game is based on knowing exactly when something is going to happen or not. How would you like it if randomly every 5 minutes the game changed the range of your warp disruptor +/- 4 km so if you got really lucky, you could scramble someone at 28 but every so often you'd get really unlucky and someone would get away at 20.

It would be more of a rush, more of a "can I keep this guy scrambled or not?" but would it be better? no! because that has nothing to do with skill, you might as just role the dice and see who wins because its not based on skill its random.

I know im exaggerating the importance a bit, but I hate the idea that I can lose a ship not because of anything I did wrong, but because I didnt appease the Eve gods correctly that day and the fates conspired against me.

I get what you're saying - I just don't agree with it. That random component actually helps the combat feel more real to me. Consider for example, you can make all the right choices, do all the right things, and still get run over by a bus because the guy driving it wasn't paying attention. No fault of your own - you did what you were supposed to do, but fate (if you like) rolled the dice and popped you one.

If anything, they should add the randomizer to missile damage and throw in critical misses too (oops, gun jammed - reload your ammo and start firing again).

There's nothing random about a car. It is a predictable machine. You didn't get run over by just a car; the driver ran you over.

What Sigras is saying is that the unpredictability or randomness should come from the pilot (aka your driver behind the wheel) not the ship/modules.

If anything this makes the game more real because everything directly reflects the human element of imperfection.

All the arguments against this in the thread are based on the fact there would be no more randomness in the game if modules (in this case turrets) did the same predictable task. This is simply not true. The random would always happen for example:

(1) Not all ships are fitted the same way so I still can't predict the fight of say a vulture vs. vulture
(2) All pilots are at different skill levels in knowledge and experience, you will always encounter different people with different tactics or, to put it tactfully, just don't know how to pvp. This means that a Hurricane from a 2004 player will probably win over a 2011 player simply because he knows the strengths and weaknesses of his ship, even if both ships are fitted exactly the same.
(3)You will never encounter in pvp the "Alliance Tournament" scenario where you have 10 or 100 ships vs. 10 or 100 ships where all of them are fitted exactly the same. You can come close to this but it will never be perfectly even.
(4) 100 zealots will beat another 100 zealots .... why? because of the human element..... Your FC sucks, your fleet is at bad range, 15 of your 100 zealot pilots are slow to the draw etc.

In conclusion, randomness should be from the person not the game.

Exactly, the random element should come from the other person sitting at his computer controlling his ship not from some uncontrollable element in the game.


Because Eve is a competitive environment that can be controlled, so it should be controlled to make it as fair as possible.

Think about it this way, in basketball if every time a shot was made, a coin was flipped and if heads the shot was worth 2x normal, 90% of games would be unaffected, but there are 10% of games that would be decided by pure luck, and I think that's wrong.

Nobody manufactures a game mechanic involving random chance in a competitive environment, why should Eve?

oh, ive already made the concession that it isnt at all realistic, but I look at this as more of a sport or a competition than a facsimile of real life.

and THAT, is where you don't get EVE.
yes, it is a game.
yes, it is competitive.
but unfortunately, alot of people (or at elast the more important players) act like this IS their real life and the weird room thier computer is in is the SIMS or something.

I lol'd. Hell, I could actually see that, but technically, wouldn't it rip the ship apart?