Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tara Kapan
|
Posted - 2011.05.30 23:24:00 -
[1]
The main purpose of this thread is to discuss balancing issues with tech 3 ships (tengu and proteus generally, but loki as well). in order to provide proof of the opness of tech 3 boats, i will be using public evidence that ccp has documented for us of small gang fighting. I am of course talking about the preliminary matches for the alliance tournament this past weekend. These are the results of only matches involving tech 3 ships, ignoring those with the same number on each side.
1. more t3 wins 2. more t3 wins 4. more t3 wins 6. more t3 wins 9. more t3 wins 10.more t3 loses (finally!) 11.more t3 wins 12.more t3 wins 13.more t3 wins 15.more t3 wins 16.more t3 wins 19.more t3 wins 22.more t3 wins 23.more t3 loses (only one t3 and no logi = fail) 24.more t3 loses (oneiros with matar fleet? no wonder) 25.more t3 wins 26.more t3 loses (noobies with no drones to rep logi = fail) 27.more t3 loses (check adeptus arbites on killboards = nuff said) 29.more t3 wins
From the data shown above, we can see that in 14/19 of the matches, the team with more tech 3 ships won. In all the losing matches, there are generally pretty solid reasons as to why they lost. For match 27, just check their killboard for reasoning. also, they were going up against tourney vets, AAA, so they never really stood a chance.
Conclusion = if you use more tech 3 boats then whoever you are facing, then you statistically have a 74% chance to win based on setup alone. THATS NOT OP AT ALL. rofl
please post comments =)
|
Daneel Trevize
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.05.31 00:12:00 -
[2]
Count it again with Tengus compared to other T3s. You can't tell me the Proteus needs a nerf for outside of such artificial matches. Did anyone field a Legion in the 5v5s? |
Satallius
|
Posted - 2011.05.31 01:28:00 -
[3]
Aren't tech 3 ships supposed to be bad ass? Hence why they are t3, and cost a buttload of ISK (exchange rate of buttloads to ISK pending) to field?
|
Adele Godel
|
Posted - 2011.05.31 06:17:00 -
[4]
This doesnt mean t3s are OP, it just means that in the artificial rules of the AT, they are OP. They dont cost enough points.
|
Celia Therone
|
Posted - 2011.05.31 09:02:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Adele Godel This doesnt mean t3s are OP, it just means that in the artificial rules of the AT, they are OP. They dont cost enough points.
Pretty much this, and I'd go so far as to say T3's costing too few points was obvious beforehand from the last tourney, along with bombers and logistics in the ten man part of the competition.
Imho they should multiply the points cost of everything by ten to make it easier to adjust costs.
For example under the current regime if you think a 2 point ship is overpowered then all you can do is raise its cost to 3 points (holy 50% increase, batman) whereas if it was 20 points you could increase it to 21 or 22.
|
Target Painter
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.05.31 10:00:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Tara Kapan i will be using public evidence that ccp has documented for us of small gang fighting.
Sandbox small-gang PvP is literally nothing like the Alliance Tournament.
|
YUMAD BRO
|
Posted - 2011.05.31 11:15:00 -
[7]
YAAAAAA I lose to T3's YAAAAAA I suck at this game YAAAAAA please help me to be better by making others worse YAAAAAA WHy T3's win all the time????
YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Cry more NUB hahahahahahahahahahahaha
|
fgft Athonille
|
Posted - 2011.05.31 12:55:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Satallius Aren't tech 3 ships supposed to be bad ass? Hence why they are t3, and cost a buttload of ISK (exchange rate of buttloads to ISK pending) to field?
the tengu is. the others not so much, the only way they are badass is in ganglinks or as a rapier that wont die in a fire in an ab hac scenario
Originally by: Target Painter
Sandbox small-gang PvP is literally nothing like the Alliance Tournament.
tengus are pretty much the end game answer to small gang pvp anyways
|
Tara Kapan
|
Posted - 2011.06.09 20:31:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Tara Kapan on 09/06/2011 20:33:32
Originally by: Adele Godel This doesnt mean t3s are OP, it just means that in the artificial rules of the AT, they are OP. They dont cost enough points.
That is definitely one thing proven by this. In addition, im using this as evidence that tech 3 ships are op for small gang pvp. In the past, you could dominate in a way similar to a tech3 by buying really expensive equipment. now, you can just buy a tech3, which not only accomplishes that, but does it in every aspect. In a sense, tech 3 ships have no role. It is a ship made to fill a bunch of roles, and fills them better than anything else. It is a jack of all trades, and master of all. In the past, CCP has made ship types to perform specific roles. It was always pretty obvious what each ship was supposed to do. With the addition of tech 3 ships, there was a single ship class created to fill lots of roles. One that makes multiple other ship classes obsolete.
--best examples-- HAC - Med-High tank/damage output, good sensor strength, pretty good electronic defences, medium speed, moderate utility. Recon - Low damage output. med-high tank. good sensor strength, pretty good electronic defences, medium speed, high utility.
T3 - med-very high tank/damage output, strong sensor strength, strong electronic defences, medium speed, higher utility
it pretty much covers both the hac and recon class and puts them together. It basically makes all ships cruiser/bc class useless in comparison, besides hictors and command ships.
What i generally suggest to fix T3 ships is to force people to choose only one role, in one of many different ways. Best way that i can come up with is lowering base buffs and giving bonuses if people have certain corresponding modules so they are more effective at different roles.
Also, i believe, like pretty much everyone else, that as far as pvp goes tengu>proteus>loki>legion. there are pretty dramatic effectiveness drops between these ships, and i am really ****ing clueless as to why CCP just keeps on plowing on with their **** and completely ignoring this. its not that hard ccp, just switch some ****ing buffs around, and make the crap t3s better, or nerf the better ones.(or both)
Originally by: YUMAD BRO YAAAAAA Im a flaming ****ing ***got, and everyone hates me
wtf??? nobody cares about you scrub. just come out of the closet to your parents already instead of being a ***** about it and flaming on the internet ***boy. EL OH EL
|
Manda Rin
Minmatar Sexy Thoughts
|
Posted - 2011.06.09 20:41:00 -
[10]
Lol, what a load of twaddle. Come back when you have a clue (or a battleclinic record) scrub.
|
|
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.06.10 02:11:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Tara Kapan The main purpose of this thread is to discuss balancing issues with tech 3 ships (tengu and proteus generally, but loki as well). in order to provide proof of the opness of tech 3 boats, i will be using public evidence that ccp has documented for us of small gang fighting. I am of course talking about the preliminary matches for the alliance tournament this past weekend. These are the results of only matches involving tech 3 ships, ignoring those with the same number on each side.
1. more t3 wins 2. more t3 wins 4. more t3 wins 6. more t3 wins 9. more t3 wins 10.more t3 loses (finally!) 11.more t3 wins 12.more t3 wins 13.more t3 wins 15.more t3 wins 16.more t3 wins 19.more t3 wins 22.more t3 wins 23.more t3 loses (only one t3 and no logi = fail) 24.more t3 loses (oneiros with matar fleet? no wonder) 25.more t3 wins 26.more t3 loses (noobies with no drones to rep logi = fail) 27.more t3 loses (check adeptus arbites on killboards = nuff said) 29.more t3 wins
From the data shown above, we can see that in 14/19 of the matches, the team with more tech 3 ships won. In all the losing matches, there are generally pretty solid reasons as to why they lost. For match 27, just check their killboard for reasoning. also, they were going up against tourney vets, AAA, so they never really stood a chance.
Conclusion = if you use more tech 3 boats then whoever you are facing, then you statistically have a 74% chance to win based on setup alone. THATS NOT OP AT ALL. rofl
please post comments =)
And now compare T2 ships vs their T1 counterparts. If T2's win most fights should they also be nerfed because they overpower T1's most of the time?
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
Dray
Caldari Euphoria Released HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2011.06.27 12:40:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Dray on 27/06/2011 12:40:59
Originally by: Target Painter
Originally by: Tara Kapan i will be using public evidence that ccp has documented for us of small gang fighting.
Sandbox small-gang PvP is literally nothing like the Alliance Tournament.
This.
|
Typecast
|
Posted - 2011.06.27 12:48:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Target Painter
Originally by: Tara Kapan i will be using public evidence that ccp has documented for us of small gang fighting.
Sandbox small-gang PvP is literally nothing like the Alliance Tournament.
You mean people don't organise small gangs with a 100 point system, then engage similar 100 point fleets and no one ever breaks this agreement or a 3rd party never comes in and blobs both of these 'honor' fleets?
Wat
|
Irie Irie Irie
Caldari Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta
|
Posted - 2011.06.27 14:57:00 -
[14]
My spacehonoure senses are tingling ~~~
|
Starlight Twilight
Amarr
|
Posted - 2011.06.27 22:47:00 -
[15]
fyi I sold my 'almost perfect skill' legion a while ago because it sucks at PVE and every PVP encounter I have been in had neuts O o /»________________________ | LAAZZZAAARRRRRRZZZZ!!!!!!!!! \_»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»» |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |