Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 13 post(s) |
|
CCP Logibro
C C P C C P Alliance
1465
|
Posted - 2016.07.26 16:44:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hey guys
Here is the place to discuss the changes we've made to the rules for AT XIV since the release of the original rules.
So far, these are the changes:
Quote:Teams may field no more than one unique special edition ship at any given time.
The current list of unique special edition ships includes: Apocalypse Imperial Issue, Armageddon Imperial Issue, Megathron Federate Issue, Raven State Issue, Tempest Tribal Issue, Guardian-Vexor, Mimir, Adrestia, Vangel, Etana, Moracha, Chameleon, Fiend, Rabisu, Stratios Emergency Responder, Gold Magnate, Silver Magnate, Freki, Utu, Malice, Cambion, Chremoas, Whiptail, Imp, Caedes
Quote:Heavy Interdictors have increased in points cost by 1 to 13
CCP Logibro // EVE Universe Community Team // Distributor of Nanites // Patron Saint of Logistics
@CCP_Logibro
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
14266
|
Posted - 2016.07.26 16:57:37 -
[2] - Quote
We don't currently foresee the need to make any other rules changes, but we of course reserve the right to do so if needed.
I also want to make sure everyone is aware that there will be two monthly EVE releases between now and the tournament start, and another release in between the 2nd and 3rd weekend (on October 11th). There likely will be some changes to EVE ships in some of these releases, so teams are advised to stay flexible in the specifics of their tactics.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Ncc 1709
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc.
297
|
Posted - 2016.07.26 18:32:29 -
[3] - Quote
Can we get a link to the rules stickied in the forum please |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
14266
|
Posted - 2016.07.26 18:46:45 -
[4] - Quote
Ncc 1709 wrote:Can we get a link to the rules stickied in the forum please
Good idea, done.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Arloste Rampage
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2016.07.26 21:11:01 -
[5] - Quote
does the special edition rule mean one special ship per comp or one unique special ship per comp, as in, woud malice and etana in one comp be ok? both special edition ships being unique, as in, not the same |
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
135
|
Posted - 2016.07.26 21:36:38 -
[6] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:I also want to make sure everyone is aware that there will be two monthly EVE releases between now and the tournament start, and another release in between the 2nd and 3rd weekend (on October 11th). There likely will be some changes to EVE ships in some of these releases, so teams are advised to stay flexible in the specifics of their tactics. Will these changes include warfare link mechanics? If so, it would be pretty important to have that information early so we can at least simulate the behaviour in testing. |
Annie Gardet
V0LTA WE FORM V0LTA
9
|
Posted - 2016.07.27 08:37:21 -
[7] - Quote
Are overloaded ASB allowed this year ? I think we need some clarification about this. |
SoulLess Zealot
Beyond Thunderdome.
56
|
Posted - 2016.07.27 08:42:56 -
[8] - Quote
Arloste Rampage wrote:does the special edition rule mean one special ship per comp or one unique special ship per comp, as in, woud malice and etana in one comp be ok? both special edition ships being unique, as in, not the same
Quote: Teams may field no more than one unique special edition ship at any given time.
I would take this to mean no more that 1 special edition ship feilded by a team at a time. Ie a malice and etana would not be legal only one or the other |
Arloste Rampage
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2016.07.27 10:54:20 -
[9] - Quote
SoulLess Zealot wrote:Arloste Rampage wrote:does the special edition rule mean one special ship per comp or one unique special ship per comp, as in, woud malice and etana in one comp be ok? both special edition ships being unique, as in, not the same Quote: Teams may field no more than one unique special edition ship at any given time. I would take this to mean no more that 1 special edition ship feilded by a team at a time. Ie a malice and etana would not be legal only one or the other
just wondering if that unique-word is part of the special edition term, or if UNIQUE special edition ships have a hardcap of 1/comp |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
14268
|
Posted - 2016.07.27 11:24:38 -
[10] - Quote
It means that you can have just one of any of the listed ships in any given comp.
For instance: 2x Malice isn't allowed Etana+Fiend also isn't allowed
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
Teddy KGB
Crushing Power of Gallente Galaxy Spiritus
33
|
Posted - 2016.07.27 20:08:41 -
[11] - Quote
I think EW scripts like dampeners & tracking disruptors must be allowed this year, as sensor booster mechanics changed. Banning scripts for EW modules will make tournament too primitive in my opinion. |
Jump SuperCaps Now
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
23
|
Posted - 2016.07.28 01:20:13 -
[12] - Quote
If a flag ship is a "unique ship" can you still field another unique since the flag is the flag?
Example - Imperial Navy Apoc + Malice
or does it not matter if the flag is an unique? |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
14273
|
Posted - 2016.07.28 10:54:39 -
[13] - Quote
Jump SuperCaps Now wrote:If a flag ship is a "unique ship" can you still field another unique since the flag is the flag?
Example - Imperial Navy Apoc + Malice
or does it not matter if the flag is an unique?
Also how many pts are the ships like the Imperial Apoc / Tribal Tempest?
Are they 21 pts like faction ships? or 19 pts like navy ships?
The flagship doesn't allow you to bypass limits on numbers of any ship type, so no a Imperial Navy Apoc + Malice would not be allowed.
The unique battleships are produced by the four empires so they count as navy faction battleships: 19 points.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Annie Gardet
V0LTA WE FORM V0LTA
9
|
Posted - 2016.07.28 11:13:03 -
[14] - Quote
Annie Gardet wrote:Are overloaded ASB allowed this year ? I think we need some clarification about this.
|
Cade Windstalker
522
|
Posted - 2016.07.28 14:30:01 -
[15] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Current ruleset: https://community.eveonline.com/community/alliance-tournament/rules/ We don't currently foresee the need to make any other rules changes, but we of course reserve the right to do so if needed. I also want to make sure everyone is aware that there will be two monthly EVE releases between now and the tournament start, and another release in between the 2nd and 3rd weekend (on October 11th). There likely will be some changes to EVE ships in some of these releases, so teams are advised to stay flexible in the specifics of their tactics.
Great that CCP is giving people a heads up on things like this, though could you maybe try not to land ship changes directly in the middle of the tournament? As a spectator it's generally just not as much fun to watch when everyone is scrambling to adapt to something. That's not to say that it can't make for fun moments, but more often than not IMO it doesn't.
I personally think the playerbase would understand if ship changes were pushed off into a point release so they don't interfere with the AT, and I believe CCP has done something similar in the past as well. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
14279
|
Posted - 2016.08.02 18:52:08 -
[16] - Quote
Annie Gardet wrote:Are overloaded ASB allowed this year ? I think we need some clarification about this.
No, over-full modules will not be allowed this year.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
14279
|
Posted - 2016.08.02 20:02:59 -
[17] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Current ruleset: https://community.eveonline.com/community/alliance-tournament/rules/ We don't currently foresee the need to make any other rules changes, but we of course reserve the right to do so if needed. I also want to make sure everyone is aware that there will be two monthly EVE releases between now and the tournament start, and another release in between the 2nd and 3rd weekend (on October 11th). There likely will be some changes to EVE ships in some of these releases, so teams are advised to stay flexible in the specifics of their tactics. Great that CCP is giving people a heads up on things like this, though could you maybe try not to land ship changes directly in the middle of the tournament? As a spectator it's generally just not as much fun to watch when everyone is scrambling to adapt to something. That's not to say that it can't make for fun moments, but more often than not IMO it doesn't. I personally think the playerbase would understand if ship changes were pushed off into a point release so they don't interfere with the AT, and I believe CCP has done something similar in the past as well.
Benefits for the game as a whole always need to be higher priority than clearing the schedule around the tournament. The good news is that as always any game balance changes will impact all teams evenly, so the teams that prove to be the smartest will adjust faster and come out on top.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Cade Windstalker
527
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 17:48:53 -
[18] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Benefits for the game as a whole always need to be higher priority than clearing the schedule around the tournament. The good news is that as always any game balance changes will impact all teams evenly, so the teams that prove to be the smartest will adjust faster and come out on top.
Fair enough, thanks for the response!
Looking forward to both the tournament and incoming balance changes! (In before someone fields a team of Exhumers xD) |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
14281
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 18:28:02 -
[19] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Benefits for the game as a whole always need to be higher priority than clearing the schedule around the tournament. The good news is that as always any game balance changes will impact all teams evenly, so the teams that prove to be the smartest will adjust faster and come out on top. Fair enough, thanks for the response! Looking forward to both the tournament and incoming balance changes! (In before someone fields a team of Exhumers xD)
Truestory: we don't allow Exhumers in the tournament because we're afraid someone would actually bring battleskiffs and tank for days.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Cade Windstalker
531
|
Posted - 2016.08.07 23:36:32 -
[20] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Benefits for the game as a whole always need to be higher priority than clearing the schedule around the tournament. The good news is that as always any game balance changes will impact all teams evenly, so the teams that prove to be the smartest will adjust faster and come out on top. Fair enough, thanks for the response! Looking forward to both the tournament and incoming balance changes! (In before someone fields a team of Exhumers xD) Truestory: we don't allow Exhumers in the tournament because we're afraid someone would actually bring battleskiffs and tank for days.
Oh geez, that's hilarious xD
Thanks for sharing CCP Fozzie, you're the best. BRB laughing my socks off. |
|
Ncc 1709
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc.
297
|
Posted - 2016.08.12 11:09:38 -
[21] - Quote
but but but... we wanted our token procurer :( |
Faffywaffy
SoT The Afterlife.
92
|
Posted - 2016.08.14 00:26:24 -
[22] - Quote
Just a clarification - is non-rare pirate ammo, e.g. Arch Angel, also banned? |
|
CCP Logibro
C C P C C P Alliance
1486
|
Posted - 2016.08.14 00:39:41 -
[23] - Quote
Faffywaffy wrote:Just a clarification - is non-rare pirate ammo, e.g. Arch Angel, also banned?
Yes. The only faction ammo you can use is Navy.
CCP Logibro // EVE Universe Community Team // Distributor of Nanites // Patron Saint of Logistics
@CCP_Logibro
|
|
Leeloo Killik
Everyone vs Everything THE R0NIN
71
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 13:44:19 -
[24] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Annie Gardet wrote:Are overloaded ASB allowed this year ? I think we need some clarification about this. No, over-full modules will not be allowed this year.
Could someone explain what does this mean exactly? |
Annie Gardet
V0LTA WE FORM V0LTA
9
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 14:37:40 -
[25] - Quote
Leeloo Killik wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Annie Gardet wrote:Are overloaded ASB allowed this year ? I think we need some clarification about this. No, over-full modules will not be allowed this year. Could someone explain what does this mean exactly?
My question was regarding modules containing more charges than a normal module. For exemple, the ASB was introduced in Inferno and was able to contain 13 faction charges. It was nerfed later the same year to a more reasonable 9 charges. However ship which hasn't been reffited or used since the nerf still have 13 charges, making them very powerfull. Same goes for the RLML. |
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles Spectre Fleet Alliance
502
|
Posted - 2016.08.16 00:18:30 -
[26] - Quote
The ASB with 13 charges was so totally boss you just tanked everything! It was very OP at the time. The 9 charge limit is much more balanced.
AKA the scientist.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
Faffywaffy
SoT The Afterlife.
92
|
Posted - 2016.08.25 20:08:33 -
[27] - Quote
Another clarification, please.
I understand that deploying cargo containers is not allowed, but is it allowed to simply keep them in cargo (in order to extend one's cargohold)? |
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
136
|
Posted - 2016.08.26 18:43:51 -
[28] - Quote
FWIW, I was told not to do this in AT11 (I think?), so at least the tool was flagging cans back then. |
Faffywaffy
SoT The Afterlife.
92
|
Posted - 2016.08.26 23:53:37 -
[29] - Quote
Yeah, it still flags it, but maybe that's a bug. |
Faffywaffy
SoT The Afterlife.
92
|
Posted - 2016.08.29 11:25:13 -
[30] - Quote
Can I still get an official ruling, please? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |