Should abilities have a to-hit roll?
View Single Post
Join Date: Jun 2012
02-14-2013, 07:59 PM
Originally Posted by
I already listed a bunch of the RNG that already exists in the game...
...the skill involved in this game is about maximizing your fluke to get an advantage over your opponent's fluke. That wouldn't change.
It certainly would change. Getting lucky or unlucky on crits or procs is something that can be averaged out in a game. The better team will win regardless 99 times out of 100.
If the first two subnukes on my team hit, but the other side's miss, a domino effect can start up that will shift the entire momentum of the match. Lining up a kill with buffs and debuffs is something that comes down to coordination. Add this pants-on-head-retarded idea to the game and it comes down to fluke. If expertly executed team work is going to fail, it should be down to the other side being even more on the ball, not down to the roll of a dice.
It's true that there's already a certain amount of randomness in some areas of the games, but that's a silly excuse to add randomness to the rest. There's such a thing as a good middle ground. Hell, I'd even go as far as to say that randomness in some areas needs to be toned down -- phaser shield procs for instance, or calling in a dreadnought with fleet support. Randomness should have the
to sway the result of a confrontation one way or the other, but should never be the primary catalyst by which an outcome is decided.
People here need to spend less time campaigning their obviously dumb pet ideas, and more time forming teams so they can learn how to play and increase the level of competition in the game. I guarantee you that doing the later will minimize the former, and help us present a more unified and coherent front. Massive amounts of crap threads like these confuse Cryptic and serve to hide real issues through sheer volume. Wise up, people.