Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Potrero
Gallente Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 23:51:00 -
[1]
In the two rounds leading into the final game the same team presented two made-to-order counter setups for their adversaries.
Both of these games were decided before the first shot was fired. The same team went on to take both rounds with one or no losses on their side.
I don't know if this happened in the final round or not because by then I tuned out.
Didn't bother to watch.
There were some great games leading into the finals. A couple could have gone either way. But if the tournament becomes one of which team can best "predict" what the other team is going to field, then I'm not interested in watching.
My point isn't to take anything away from the winners, but to point out that something about the tournament should be reconsidered.
CCP needs another mechanic for how the tournaments work. Something that makes, turtle tanking, 100% jamming lockouts and the overall meta-gaming aspect of the contest much less likely.
I can only speak for myself. But this seemed a really lame finish to an otherwise great tournament. Bad enough that it's much less likely that I'll tune in in the future.
|
James 315
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.06.20 23:58:00 -
[2]
Don't blame Pandemic Legion for a lousy final match--Hydra blew it. They had three rooks going against an all-Minmatar team, and they couldn't jam anything? Of course they lost. |
Donny Maurasi
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 00:00:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Donny Maurasi on 21/06/2010 00:04:32 I'm in agreement that the obvious meta gaming by PL took away a lot from this tourney. I'm of the idea that good planning and practice should be a major part of each fight, but I didn't enjoy most PL fights due to the fact they pretty much had the "exact" counter needed to the other team.
I like EVE being open to whatever, but the tourney should be a competition against two teams in the arena, not between spys before the first ship ever undocks. With that said the last match was dumb, on Hydra's part as no amount of spying was needed as they brought the same set they had before.
Prior to that though some of the matches were pitifully awful such as when PL came with 2 sentinels and a curse with obvious full knowledge of what the other team was bringing.
Wasn't even worth watching that fight TBH..
Note to CCP.. We tune in to watch hard hitting, blowing ships up, action and to see who is the best in the end. We don't tune in to watch a team meta game their way to a lousy win.
|
Si'ren
Pod Liberation Authority WE FORM VOLTRON
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 00:01:00 -
[4]
Originally by: James 315 Don't blame Pandemic Legion for a lousy final match--Hydra blew it. They had three rooks going against an all-Minmatar team, and they couldn't jam anything? Of course they lost.
:notsureifserious:
----------------------------------------------- WE FORM VOLTRON.
Motto: No Bullsh*t. No Poasters. No Colored Text.
Seldarine > we aren't about our forum rep |
Zeta Zhul
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 00:02:00 -
[5]
Frankly ECM superiority is such an overwhelming aspect of these matches that there is no question in my mind that either ECM needs to be re-balanced or ECCM needs to be enormously improved.
And let's face it. ECM driven battles are indeed extremely boring. I can only imagine what it's like in factional warfare or SOV. ----- this signature line intentionally left blank. |
Teinyhr
Minmatar Nor'akho Matar
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 00:03:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Potrero CCP needs another mechanic for how the tournaments work. Something that makes, turtle tanking, 100% jamming lockouts and the overall meta-gaming aspect of the contest much less likely.
Sort of signed. Of course this is just my opinion but I'd like to see carnage happen, not just onesided carnage at that. IMHO Panda Team vs. Dystopia Alliance was one of the best fights in this tournament, due to it cutting it so close... If you disregard the last 10 minute cat and mouse run of course. Seriously there should be some way to stop the permalocking of the other team out of combat, as a spectator matches like PL vs. Paisti are very frustrating/boring to watch.
|
jona1
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 00:04:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Si'ren
Originally by: James 315 Don't blame Pandemic Legion for a lousy final match--Hydra blew it. They had three rooks going against an all-Minmatar team, and they couldn't jam anything? Of course they lost.
:notsureifserious:
:notsureifyoumad?:
|
Potrero
Gallente Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 00:41:00 -
[8]
Originally by: James 315 Don't blame Pandemic Legion for a lousy final match--Hydra blew it. They had three rooks going against an all-Minmatar team, and they couldn't jam anything? Of course they lost.
I'm not blaming PL. As far as I know the Pandemic Legion team broke no rules.
What I'm pointing out is that the rules need to be reconsidered.
Watching one team get jammed, damped, capped, disrupted out of the game in the first five seconds makes for a lousy match.
When it happens consistently someone should fix it.
Right now, they cap the number of logistics ships in the tournament. Maybe a cap on the number of e-war ships too.
I don't know what the fix is. I just know broken when I see it.
|
Shamis Orzoz
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 00:56:00 -
[9]
watching live broadcast = metagaming.
|
Nyphur
Pillowsoft Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 01:07:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Si'ren
Originally by: James 315 Don't blame Pandemic Legion for a lousy final match--Hydra blew it. They had three rooks going against an all-Minmatar team, and they couldn't jam anything? Of course they lost.
:notsureifserious:
He's right, Hydra had access to the same stats as everyone else. If they'd been paying attention to the PL loadouts, they'd probably have committed to an all-minmatar ECM loadout. I'd say that was their only real chance of pulling a win out of their asses. Instead, they brought a mix of racials, including Gallente which PL had never fielded.
|
|
spiked amarr
Invicta. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 01:30:00 -
[11]
It sounds to me like your *****ing about people thinking of ways to counter the opposite team to win... I agree everyone wins!
Cry more?
|
Raivi
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 01:45:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Donny Maurasi Edited by: Donny Maurasi on 21/06/2010 00:04:32 I'm in agreement that the obvious meta gaming by PL took away a lot from this tourney. I'm of the idea that good planning and practice should be a major part of each fight, but I didn't enjoy most PL fights due to the fact they pretty much had the "exact" counter needed to the other team.
I like EVE being open to whatever, but the tourney should be a competition against two teams in the arena, not between spys before the first ship ever undocks. With that said the last match was dumb, on Hydra's part as no amount of spying was needed as they brought the same set they had before.
Prior to that though some of the matches were pitifully awful such as when PL came with 2 sentinels and a curse with obvious full knowledge of what the other team was bringing.
Wasn't even worth watching that fight TBH..
Note to CCP.. We tune in to watch hard hitting, blowing ships up, action and to see who is the best in the end. We don't tune in to watch a team meta game their way to a lousy win.
It's interesting that you say that, because the Hydra match was the only one where we were able to use "metagaming" to help us predict what the opponent would field (and we would have made the same prediction if we didn't have access to the metagaming). All of the other matches where we seemed to bring a counter was due to us simply looking at what an opponent had fielded so far, or trying to guess what they would use to beat what they might think we'd bring. Some of them were situations where we tried to predict what they'd bring, they completely surprised us, but we won anyways thanks to good general purpose setups and FCing. No inside information for any of those fights. ---------------------------------------------
|
Dian'h Might
Minmatar Cash and Cargo Liberators Incorporated
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 01:52:00 -
[13]
metagaming is a huge part of eve pvp. The one thing that's consistent about PLs fleet composition is that it's always a hard counter to what the other team brings, anyone with half a brain should be able to easily use that to their advantage. It's also a common theme in eve pvp for a fight to be decided long before it starts, the real interesting part is how much damage the side that's going to loose will be able to inflict while going down.
As for ewar, remember that the arena is bounded, so there's not a whole lot of incentive to fit a warp disruptor. With that extra midslot open there's no reason not to stick a random piece of ewar in there.
- - - Dian'h Might - C&Ps resident "internet kleptomaniac" |
Bewegung
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 02:02:00 -
[14]
I agree OP.
PL did an amazing job with the rule set. The problem, as you stated, is not PL. The problem is somewhere in the rule set. The first thing that comes to mind (and not necessarily a good idea) would be to require a team to pick a setup for the first match, and continue to use that setup for the rest of the games. I suppose that could take a lot away from the meta gaming, and "ohhh, I wonder what cool setup they will use in THIS match", but would also add, and require an entirely new, different sort of strategic planning.
Anyway, really just the first idea that came to mind, but I believe a drastic change like that could help to create more interesting matches.
|
Koronos
Interstellar eXodus BricK sQuAD.
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 02:10:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Shamis Orzoz watching live broadcast = metagaming.
Win.
owait you already did. Props.
|
Creamster
Fremen Sietch DarkSide.
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 02:10:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Potrero In the two rounds leading into the final game the same team presented two made-to-order counter setups for their adversaries.
Both of these games were decided before the first shot was fired.
Pretty much. But current tourny system opens many opportunities for people willing to play mind games. We lost ours against PL - we clearly didn't expect them to just counter the setup we beat TTork's team with. Common sense was screaming to change to caldari/gallente but we decided not to. Our own damn fault.
All CCP has to do is re-balance ship points a little to bring HACs and faction cruisers back to arena and nerf bombers. I was itching to use vigilants but the price was too steep (14 vs 11 for brutix !!! )
___________ In Petition we trust |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 11:16:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Nyphur
He's right, Hydra had access to the same stats as everyone else. If they'd been paying attention to the PL loadouts, they'd probably have committed to an all-minmatar ECM loadout. I'd say that was their only real chance of pulling a win out of their asses. Instead, they brought a mix of racials, including Gallente which PL had never fielded.
Maybe we too had some meta-gamey (mis?)information upon which to choose stuff like jammers and all-minmatar not being all that clear-cut based on that? PL played the actual game as well as the metagame and won deservedly but please don't go making assumptions about "paying attention" ;)
Agreed that things like caps on ECM ships etc could make things more interesting, though very well thought out setups will still end up totalhelldeathing worse teams, it's just the nature of the game IMHO. ---------- www.eve-arena.com
|
Mr Rive
Black Omega Security Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 11:37:00 -
[18]
Dont blame PL for having 5-6 setups that work, blame alliances that stick to 1-2 and expect to breeze through with them. We won because we put the most work into our setups. Not our fault other people are lazy
|
Obyrith
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 11:37:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Obyrith on 21/06/2010 11:44:42 Edited by: Obyrith on 21/06/2010 11:40:19
Originally by: Zeta Zhul Frankly ECM superiority is such an overwhelming aspect of these matches that there is no question in my mind that either ECM needs to be re-balanced or ECCM needs to be enormously improved.
The problem isn't so much the balancing of Ewar, it's the way Ewar stacks and how that stacking affects rock-paper-scissors gameplay.
PL's 6 Ewar ship setup and the Voltron (IIRC) Dampner setup that beat CO2 demonstrate that if you bring enough pairs of scissors, you're simply going to negate any reasonable countermeasures the opponent could field without self-nerfing their ability to fight a more normal setup.
CCP might consider limiting Ewar ships to only three of each Ewar instead of ship type. So a team could field three Keres and three Kisune, but not three Kitsune and three Rooks.
Quote: And let's face it. ECM driven battles are indeed extremely boring. I can only imagine what it's like in factional warfare or SOV.
The problem from an entertainment point of view is that the exact effects of most Ewar are not apparent to the viewers of the match, so it becomes a matter of deduction to tell what's deciding the outcome. The fact that the commentators themselves often fail at explaining what's going on exemplifies the problem.
Aside from EWar the problem with the final weekend, as I understand it, was that the teams couldn't change their implants without completely destroying their existing sets. As most implant loadouts are configured towards a particular race and shiptype, that created a strong disincentive against changing setup that even affected PL, who were much more creative with the setups before then.
The solution is either let tournament teams change implants between matches without using jumpclones, or ban all implants and hardwiring and provide blank clones. The second would also slightly mitigate the importance of isk while taking absolutely nothing from the viewing experience. Either win by skill on the field or via setup, not because every pilot has 1 billion of hardwiring - that's what flagships are supposed to be for.
Both these changes would also help to slightly reduce the importance of metagaming without eliminating it.
|
Mr Rive
Black Omega Security Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 11:42:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Obyrith
Originally by: Zeta Zhul Frankly ECM superiority is such an overwhelming aspect of these matches that there is no question in my mind that either ECM needs to be re-balanced or ECCM needs to be enormously improved.
The problem isn't so much the balancing of Ewar, it's the way Ewar stacks and how that stacking affects rock-paper-scissors gameplay.
PL's 6 Ewar ship setup and the Voltron (IIRC) Dampner setup that beat CO2 demonstrate that if you bring enough pairs of scissors, you're simply going to negate any reasonable countermeasures the opponent could field without screwing their own ability to fight a halfway normal team.
No this is stupid. Any team we have pretty much beats that ECM team. The VOLTRON team (no offense voltron) was abysmal, and every team we fielded in the AT would have flattened it. Hell in the finals we faced an ECM team and annihilated it. ECM is not overpowered, its just overpowered if you bring teams that suck.
|
|
Gandolf
Gallente Black Omega Security Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 11:52:00 -
[21]
oh man i cant believe i agree with 2 Mr Rive posts in one thread
|
Obyrith
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 11:55:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Obyrith on 21/06/2010 11:58:12
Originally by: Mr Rive No this is stupid. Any team we have pretty much beats that ECM team. The VOLTRON team (no offense voltron) was abysmal, and every team we fielded in the AT would have flattened it. Hell in the finals we faced an ECM team and annihilated it. ECM is not overpowered, its just overpowered if you bring teams that suck.
Firstly, I don't care about PL and your awesomeness so much as I care about the fact that I spent 12 hours watching "meet the band" style CCP corporate ads interspersed with repetitive matches and one smart counter by Voltron.
The Voltron team (loadout?) sucked because it was specifically designed to neutralise CO2 via Dampning and Webbing, so the lower DPS could take it out. That's all it was supposed to do, so saying it sucked is missing the point.
Watching you demolish a set-up through pure skill in spite the fact that it was designed to counter your own would have been the height of Eve entertainment. That didn't ever come close to happening this time (for some reason) and so you've put yourselves in a weird position where it was hard to tell how much skill you were actually demonstrating thanks to all the accusations of metagaming and the question of whether teams were able to vary their loadouts.
BTW I'm not involved in 0.0 politics on any level, or an alt of someone who is. There's no trolling intended here - I was genuinely annoyed the last weekend fell so far short of the first two.
|
Semkhet
Dark Tornado Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 12:16:00 -
[23]
We could all spend hours arguing on this or that, overemphasizing one detail over another, dissecting tactics and strategies, etc... Fact of the matter is that PL displayed a capability defined by three simple words: intelligence, experience and dedication.
They carefully made the best of each configuration down to the last available point, and created various viable designs. For ex. their use of Kitsune or Curse was spot on given the disruption potential vs points weight.
IMHO, those who lost did as much to missing experience and hard work as to PL's excellence. I hope PL's spirit will serve as example in future tournaments. At the end of the day, bar extreme bad luck, you reap what you sow.
Props to the winners, and hope that all other teams enjoyed the tournament. |
Mr Rive
Black Omega Security Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 12:17:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Obyrith Edited by: Obyrith on 21/06/2010 12:02:32
Originally by: Mr Rive No this is stupid. Any team we have pretty much beats that ECM team. The VOLTRON team (no offense voltron) was abysmal, and every team we fielded in the AT would have flattened it. Hell in the finals we faced an ECM team and annihilated it. ECM is not overpowered, its just overpowered if you bring teams that suck.
Firstly, I don't care about PL and your awesomeness so much as I care about the fact that I spent 12 hours watching "meet the band" style CCP corporate ads interspersed with repetitive matches and one smart counter by Voltron.
The Voltron team (loadout?) sucked because it was specifically designed to neutralise CO2 via Dampning and Webbing, so the lower DPS could take it out. That's all it was supposed to do, so saying it sucked is missing the point.
Watching you demolish a set-up through pure skill in spite the fact that it was designed to counter your own would have been the height of Eve entertainment. That didn't ever come close to happening this time (for some reason) and so you've put yourselves in a weird position where it was hard to tell how much skill you were actually demonstrating thanks to all the accusations of metagaming and the question of whether any of the teams (including yours) were able to freely switch out their loadouts on the final day. Most of this has nothing to do with PL, it's a problem with the tournament format.
BTW I'm not involved in 0.0 politics on any level, or an alt of someone who is. There's no trolling intended here - I was genuinely annoyed the last weekend fell so far short of the first two.
Wrong. People lost because they put less work into their setups than us. I can think of 10 teams that were better than voltrons and more versatile that could have beaten that co2 team. co2 got as far as they did in the tourney because of pilot skill, the setup was average at best.
If you want to see a more interesting tournament next year, and ill say it again, tell people to come up with better setups. Its got nothing to do with pilot skill until you get into the arena and see what youre facing, but what setups you choose to bring. We always come up with setups that beat our setups that beat our setups, and then field the one we think will beat another team most convincingly. Nine times out of ten we just see what they bring in other matches and counter it.
And to your last point, of course no one knew how to counter our setups effectively, we had about 10 of the bloody things. Why do you think we brought the amarr rush?
Frankly we see the alliance tournament as an investment, we dont go in it to make other people happy. If other people started thinking of it like that, maybe we wouldn't make them all look like amateurs, because ill be the first to say that some of the pilots we faced are incredibly skilled PvPers, easily on a par with anything PL can bring out in game.
|
Ohne
Minmatar Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 12:20:00 -
[25]
Pretty much. But current tourny system opens many opportunities for people willing to play mind games. We lost ours against PL - we clearly didn't expect them to just counter the setup we beat TTork's team with. Common sense was screaming to change to caldari/gallente but we decided not to. Our own damn fault.
Im pretty sure that the line of thinking had nothing to do with that exact setup you fielded. Before the tourney we thought that these minnie rush setups would be popular and therefore designed a rush team that would perform against the teams that they are designed to beat (bombers/heavy ecm teams) while still beeing able to take out another similiar rush team (and since we had been using a heavy ecm team, chances of someone bringing a one race rush team are quite high).
Also alot of teams still seem to bring heavy bs setups (abaddons, machariels, etc) so even though this setup looked like the perfect counter in that situation, it was able to deal with a big variety of situations.
|
Obyrith
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 18:25:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Obyrith on 21/06/2010 18:28:32
Originally by: Mr Rive People lost because they put less work into their setups than us.
Yeah, I agree with this. But Shamis is running around saying he knows all the other team's setups, so you can't be surprised if people give you no credit for it.
Quote: I can think of 10 teams that were better than voltrons and more versatile that could have beaten that co2 team. co2 got as far as they did in the tourney because of pilot skill, the setup was average at best.
I assume you mean "ten setups that were better".
Quote: Nine times out of ten we just see what they bring in other matches and counter it.
It's quite likely they'd still be lazy and bring the same setups repeatedly in the final day (which, again, is all I had a problem with), but it couldn't hurt to make it easier to change. Then it would be clear and apparent what was actually happening (the competition sucked and you were winning by being better), there would be no excuses, and maybe one or two other Alliances would up their game a bit instead of whining about metagaming.
Quote: And to your last point, of course no one knew how to counter our setups effectively, we had about 10 of the bloody things. Why do you think we brought the amarr rush?
To create uncertainty about what you'd bring later when you were actually just going to go with Slepniers again?
Quote: Frankly we see the alliance tournament as an investment, we dont go in it to make other people happy.
Even though I don't actually believe it's only about the isk for you, I think you did a great job of doing both until this weekend. The Amarr setup in particular was a great surprise and you seemed to sc**** by with it. Repeat: my complaints have little to do with you, it's the tournament format.
|
Sidephex
Genos Occidere
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 18:32:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Potrero My Thoughts on the Finals
... are of no importance
|
Gorjer
Shut Up And Play WE FORM VOLTRON
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 18:35:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Mr Rive
No this is stupid. Any team we have pretty much beats that ECM team. The VOLTRON team (no offense voltron) was abysmal, and every team we fielded in the AT would have flattened it
I think it's a bit far to say it is abysmal, it wasn't shown to it's true potential by our pilots. Mainly due to a lack of skillpoints/ lack of practice. I don't have any proof since we never faced you, but in my opinion it could of handled at least one of your setups provided with decent fcing/ pilots and skillpoints..
Either way, congratulations on your win
|
Mr Rive
Black Omega Security Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 18:43:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Mr Rive on 21/06/2010 18:46:56
Originally by: Obyrith . Repeat: my complaints have little to do with you, it's the tournament format.
The tournament format is stellar. The people participating in it need to step up their game if you want more interesting fights.
Originally by: Gorjer
I think it's a bit far to say it is abysmal, it wasn't shown to it's true potential by our pilots. Mainly due to a lack of skillpoints/ lack of practice. I don't have any proof since we never faced you, but in my opinion it could of handled at least one of your setups provided with decent fcing/ pilots and skillpoints..
Either way, congratulations on your win
Yeah maybe abysmal was a bit harsh, but i still stand by what i said, it was an average setup at best.
You guys did well to get as far as you did. I'm not trying to say you suck. It comes down to time spent. If you had spent more time coming up with setups and practicing, you would have got further than you did, no doubt in my mind.
|
Obyrith
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 19:52:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Mr Rive The tournament format is stellar.
It could be worse.
Quote: The people participating in it need to step up their game if you want more interesting fights.
It couldn't hurt.
|
|
Orange Faeces
The Squirt Locker
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 19:58:00 -
[31]
Originally by: James 315 Don't blame Pandemic Legion for a lousy final match--Hydra blew it. They had three rooks going against an all-Minmatar team, and they couldn't jam anything? Of course they lost.
Well, HYDRA certainly could have been a little less predictable. You should, however, be informed that PL contributed to who they would meet in the final by sending their extensive research documents on other teams to potentially weaker teams, hoping to face them instead in the final. This is documented on other forums (SHC) if you care to check it out.
oF
---
|
Obyrith
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 20:07:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Orange Faeces PL contributed to who they would meet in the final by sending their extensive research documents on other teams to potentially weaker teams
I personally have no problem with this kind of thing, but it's something that CCP should feel free to let people mention in the roundtable sessions, instead of sitting around telling us what a jammer does.
This is one of the format deficiency issues. If PL are going to do stuff like this it should be possible to talk about it even in terms of "rumours". The aim should be to be like sports reporting: tabloid, sensationalistic. The fact that CCP feel they have to cautiously avoid talking about Alliance BS in 0.0 just misses out on an opportunity to heighten the drama and clue in more casual viewers to the uniqueness of the game.
|
Flinx Evenstar
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 20:09:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Orange Faeces
Originally by: James 315 Don't blame Pandemic Legion for a lousy final match--Hydra blew it. They had three rooks going against an all-Minmatar team, and they couldn't jam anything? Of course they lost.
Well, HYDRA certainly could have been a little less predictable. You should, however, be informed that PL contributed to who they would meet in the final by sending their extensive research documents on other teams to potentially weaker teams, hoping to face them instead in the final. This is documented on other forums (SHC) if you care to check it out.
oF
PL have never trolled anybody, and everything you hear should be treated like the Gospel. --- Witness epic fleet battles in Dominion
|
D4rkF4lcon
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 20:11:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Orange Faeces
Originally by: James 315 Don't blame Pandemic Legion for a lousy final match--Hydra blew it. They had three rooks going against an all-Minmatar team, and they couldn't jam anything? Of course they lost.
Well, HYDRA certainly could have been a little less predictable. You should, however, be informed that PL contributed to who they would meet in the final by sending their extensive research documents on other teams to potentially weaker teams, hoping to face them instead in the final. This is documented on other forums (SHC) if you care to check it out.
oF
The only team we had any real "spying" intel on was hydra. We leaked the hydra setup info to Voltron for a bit of revenge for test server antics, and partially because we were a bit worried about facing them in the finals.
As for the Darkside match we had exactly zero intel on them through out the whole tourney. When we thought it was a possibility we would face them in the finals, we went back looked at their old matches and saw they were consistently fielding Minmitar turret based setups. We just so happened to have a counter to those setups, so it was a safe bet to bring what we did.
Also props to Darkside only team I was actually worried about facing in the finals, partially due to our lack of intel, and :scary Russians:
As for the haters. Dont be shy just come out and say it. NERF PL etc etc.
|
Orange Faeces
The Squirt Locker
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 20:13:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Obyrith I personally have no problem with this kind of thing, but it's something that CCP should feel free to let people mention in the roundtable sessions, instead of sitting around telling us what a jammer does.
This is one of the format deficiency issues. If PL are going to do stuff like this it should be possible to talk about it even in terms of "rumours". The aim should be to be like sports reporting: tabloid, sensationalistic. The fact that CCP feel they have to cautiously avoid talking about Alliance BS in 0.0 just misses out on an opportunity to heighten the drama and clue in more casual viewers to the uniqueness of the game.
Perhaps CCP is concerned that if the truth of PL's spying advantage came to light viewers would feel a little slighted that, once again, trillions of isk are being handed to the exact same people. None of the commentators wanted to see PL win, to be sure.
O. Faeces ---
|
Obyrith
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 20:40:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Orange Faeces
Perhaps CCP is concerned that if the truth of PL's spying advantage blah blah blah
I assume you're talking about the advantage that comes from actually making the effort to spy and find out your opponent's setups, that is available to anyone who cares enough about the tournament to bother.
Anyway, dirty tricks aren't a problem for professional sports commentary: they just have an appropriately persuasive pundit take both sides so it becomes a subject of debate that draws the audience in. I don't quite get why there were no audio interviews with Alliance team leaders at any point during the webcast, the time was certainly there to be filled.
|
Orange Faeces
The Squirt Locker
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 20:45:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Obyrith I assume you're talking about the advantage that comes from actually making the effort to spy and find out your opponent's setups, that is available to anyone who cares enough about the tournament to bother.
Anyway, dirty tricks aren't a problem for professional sports commentary: they just have an appropriately persuasive pundit take both sides so it becomes a subject of debate that draws the audience in. I don't quite get why there were no audio interviews with Alliance team leaders at any point during the webcast, the time was certainly there to be filled.
Maybe that's the right way to go. Spying is part of 0.0 alliance behavior. Maybe Mittani could chair a roundtable?
oF ---
|
Obyrith
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 21:31:00 -
[38]
I'm sure Mittani would **** all over the place if you offered him a chance to pontificate in front of 15,000 eve players at once.
|
Max Romeo
|
Posted - 2010.06.21 22:26:00 -
[39]
PL only won because of : 2% better hardwires metagaming domination ammo
It is clearly evident that (see : darkside game) FC quality and communication does _NOT_ come to play in the AT. It's completely overrated and it was only things like the +2% hardwires that got them anywhere.
|
Elektrea
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.06.22 10:31:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Donny Maurasi Edited by: Donny Maurasi on 21/06/2010 00:04:32 I'm in agreement that the obvious meta gaming by PL took away a lot from this tourney. I'm of the idea that good planning and practice should be a major part of each fight, but I didn't enjoy most PL fights due to the fact they pretty much had the "exact" counter needed to the other team.
You're taking the term metagaming too far. Spying only helped versus some teams. Most teams we anticipated through watching what other teams brought, via the live thread.
Adapt or gtfo. ----------
|
|
Elektrea
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.06.22 11:03:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Elektrea on 22/06/2010 11:05:05
Originally by: Donny Maurasi Edited by: Donny Maurasi on 21/06/2010 00:04:32 I'm in agreement that the obvious meta gaming by PL took away a lot from this tourney. I'm of the idea that good planning and practice should be a major part of each fight, but I didn't enjoy most PL fights due to the fact they pretty much had the "exact" counter needed to the other team.
You're taking the term metagaming too far. Spying only helped versus some teams. Most teams we anticipated through watching what other teams brought, via the live feed.
Adapt or gtfo. ----------
|
Klee Tarris
Amarr Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2010.06.22 18:43:00 -
[42]
I have no doubt that PL take any AT insanely seriously. In fact I'd bet Shamis & the other PL pilots have practised every online gaming minute to trying out setups since AT8 was first announced (maybe since AT7 finished ?).
So what if they had spies out - it's not that any other team can't have done the same thing so what's the problem ?
If an alliance wants the top prize so much that they invest so much time & effort in to winning it every time, then they deserve to win it... every time...
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |