The idea of the Tornado and its counterparts sounds interesting, if difficult to balance. However, it is depressing that you are taling about it as a tier 3 battlecruiser. Doesn't everyone accept that tiers are a bad idea?

The idea of tiers is to have a set of ships that are designed to be slightly less powerful and slightly cheaper. Tier 1 battlecruisers include the Cyclone and the Ferox. Tier 2 battlecruisers include the Hurricane and the Drake. The problem is that people are very rarely going to use tier 1 ships. Why use a bad ship, when there is a better version. We know that cost isn't a good balancing technique, this is particularly true when the cost difference is only 10-20% (after insurance, rigged and t2 fitted). CCP knows the exact statistics on how few people fly tier 1 ships, but we all know that you rarely see Feroxes and Cyclones, particularly compared to the tier 2 BCs.

Why deliberately design a ship to be weak and therefore unusable? Why not get rid of tiers and make all battlecruisers different, but equally powerful? (Same for battleships.) If the Cyclone was buffed, then it would be a viable alternative to the Hurricane for solo or very small gangs. People would have more ships to use, a greater choice of tactics and a wider variety of opponents.

Tiers just seem like a bad idea. Am I missing something? It would be a bit of a waste of time if these new tier 3 BCs just made the tier 2 ones obsolete and we still only really had 4 useful ships.

Ehe I don't know about you, but I use tier 1 BC/BS a lot for allt he right reasons because each ship is good at doing something. (granted ferox is meh)

So I see no sense in your reasoning.

Tbh its not 100% true.

For example: Cyclone and Hurricane. Both are used because the Cyclone allows you to go active tank. And thats a different playstyle.

Same goes for Gallente: Brutix and Myrm. Both offer different styles (Facemelting DPS Glasscannon or active tank vs Drone Boat with active tank)

For Caldari and Amarr thats not true though. Ferox sux ass because Hybrids suck ass. And the bonuses suck aswell. And the Amarr T1 BC is only viable as massive brick. But because everybody knows its a Brick no one (or few) will fall for it being used as bait.

So I would strongly recommend to rework some T1 BCs before making T3 BCs.

I'm curious what industrial players think of tiers. I realize most players only think a difference in tiers means a difference in cost and number of guns, but the different mineral costs between tiers isn't something that should be so easily overlooked.

Most Mining barges have a very specific and unique purpose, ie the skiff is for deep core mining, mackinaw is for ice and the hulk is for ore. I feel tiered ships are ok if ther have a purpose for being tiered some are just bad ships.

Maybe so, but look at the T1 versions and you will see the problem, ie the procurer. There is currently no reason to use the procurer at all since it can be outmined by almost anything, is as slow as the bigger mining barges and since it takes just a few hours to get to mining barges lvl 3 everyone just skips the procurer and use the retriever instead.

Which is why it should either be the token stepping stone into the barge class, or balanced to be worth using. Applying relative specialisations amongst the ships isn't a bad idea if they're all equally potent at their jobs.

+1. I support the elimination of tiering. It results in far too many hulls that are completely useless, even though they have a unique and viable concept.

Lets look at the t1 amarr frigates just cause I am most familiar with them.

Executioner: Very fast, cheap, low damage. Role as fast tackle. Unusable due to inadequate slots and PG/CPU
Crucifier: EWAR and fleet support. Unusable due to inadequate EHP and PG.
Inquisitor: High DPS with damage type selection. The only amarr frigate with these two traits. Unusable due to inadequate PG.
Punisher: Moderate DPS high tank. Has tier 3 fitting space. Coincidentally, is the only amarr t1 frig ever flown.

Notice a theme there? Lets get those alternate roles up and attractive, add variety and interest to the game and pvp tactics- all you gotta do is update the stupid tiering thing.

And the Amarr T1 BC is only viable as massive brick. But because everybody knows its a Brick no one (or few) will fall for it being used as bait.

So I would strongly recommend to rework some T1 BCs before making T3 BCs.

Thoughts on my suggestion a few posts up? Just asking cos of the amarr frigs being mentioned.

I missed that post somehow. I agree with your bolded principles; I hadn't categorized the details quite like that but your description and justification makes perfect sense.

Agreed that BC's are in the worst shape. Frigates second, cruisers 3rd. BS's are mostly OK, since the bottom tier ships can still be given useful fittings and are arguably balanced by the lower cost, which at the BS price level is significant. Fixing hybrids will by default fix the BS balance that currently exist imo (Rokh, mega, hype). BC's only have one useful hull per race, frigates the same, although not quite to the same level of disparity. Cruisers have 1 or 2 out of 4 options per race and are workable, but definately need attention.

I'll speak to the Amarr cruisers; Arbitrator needs a hair more PG (although it's currently one of the best ships in the lineup so very little is needed; I'd really just like the option of using medium guns), omen needs a full 10% more PG, maller needs a flight of light drones. Auguror is the redheaded step child; perhaps throw a dps bonus in there somewhere to make it an entry tier as you described. That should square it up for amarr. For BC's, the Proph needs about 10% more cap and PG buffed to just below Harby levels. Simply being able to fit larger guns will bring it's DPS high enough to be worth flying.

Other races I won't comment on due to lack of piloting experience.

Maybe so, but look at the T1 versions and you will see the problem, ie the procurer. There is currently no reason to use the procurer at all since it can be outmined by almost anything, is as slow as the bigger mining barges and since it takes just a few hours to get to mining barges lvl 3 everyone just skips the procurer and use the retriever instead.

On that same note the covetor takes so long to get to and by then you could fly a hulk they are just as useless as a procurer, but without those ships there would be nothing to make T2 ships with. I don't like that some ships have good T1 versions and then no T2 version, take the myrmidon and brutix, the brutix got 2 T2 hulls, the myrmidon would have made a n excellent command ship

You see no sense in making the dozens of frigates that have zero use because of terrible slot layouts, a direct result of the tier system, actually useful?

you have not been playing long have you.

the tier system is not fixed, its just a way of keeping track of what ship of what race is generally supposed to correspond to what ship of another race. Not some fixed system.

You use tiers to talk about two or more ships of the same tier, not a better worse comparison.

the tier system is fixed, lower tier ships cost less to make, and require lower skill levels to use and as a result has lower hp/pg/cpu and less slots, making them worse ships than their higher tier brethren.

so you want all ships to be equally useful?

that's not going to happen.

You want all ships to have good slot layouts, PG and CPU?

that's also not going to happen.

Why?

well, for one, because all ships were not created equal.

To be honest, there is no point to this post since the problem is not with the tier system, but with the fact that T1 frigs are generally underpowered - which they are supposed to be.

so you want all ships to be equally useful?

that's not going to happen.

You want all ships to have good slot layouts, PG and CPU?

that's also not going to happen.

Why?

well, for one, because all ships were not created equal.

To be honest, there is no point to this post since the problem is not with the tier system, but with the fact that T1 frigs are generally underpowered - which they are supposed to be.

I'm all for removing the tiers, especially if that means the Drake get the same stats as the Ferox.

Tiers don't really mean **** when you know how to effectively employ them in a fleet, or solo:

Examples:

The Brutix-class Battlecruiser with a dual-web configuration makes an excellent point-defense against smaller craft that would normally be a pain in the *** during a fleet engagement. Also, they can deal significant DPS with or without drones (I've known people to fit Target Painter drones on their Brutix to aid missile boats in fleet, or ECM drones to assist with creating chaos among the enemy ranks).

The Dominix-class Battleship can effectively run an active tank, and remote reps while retaining cap stability, and being able to utilize drones to effectively engage incoming tacklers (utilizing lights), DPS ships (countering cruisers with mediums, or BC and up with Heavies), and aid in DPS by letting out a flight of Sentries.

So just before you think about doing away with tiers, just remember, everything has a role to fill if fit properly, and flown by a competent, skilled pilot.

Tiers don't really mean **** when you know how to effectively employ them in a fleet, or solo:

Examples:

The Brutix-class Battlecruiser with a dual-web configuration makes an excellent point-defense against smaller craft that would normally be a pain in the *** during a fleet engagement. Also, they can deal significant DPS with or without drones (I've known people to fit Target Painter drones on their Brutix to aid missile boats in fleet, or ECM drones to assist with creating chaos among the enemy ranks).

The Dominix-class Battleship can effectively run an active tank, and remote reps while retaining cap stability, and being able to utilize drones to effectively engage incoming tacklers (utilizing lights), DPS ships (countering cruisers with mediums, or BC and up with Heavies), and aid in DPS by letting out a flight of Sentries.

So just before you think about doing away with tiers, just remember, everything has a role to fill if fit properly, and flown by a competent, skilled pilot.

I think Lilli explained the reason for the broken tier system pretty well. Changes in other parts of the game had ramifications on the choice of ships.
I submit for consideration that the fix may not lie in constantly tweaking ships but perhaps adjusting the skill training times. The Procurer is the classic example. It's a fine tier one ship (lackluster, but it's there to give you a ship for going with Barges instead of Cruiser on your path to a dedicated mining player) but ONLY if stepping up to a Retreiver wasn't a matter of a couple hours. Given that, the Procurer is an utter waste of isk.
The reason I hesitate to tweak the ships (much) is that the result is pretty much make them all the same. The idea of roles is nice, but making ships too focused at the lower end of the spectrum also limits their use by low SP characters, who are the people we are talking about, since anyone playing for a few months is well into specializing in some aspect of Eve and SP is no longer applicable for the low end, generalized types of ship (frig, cruiser, BC)
I don't know if getting rid of tiers is the answer, nor fiddling with the ships very much- but I agree that the system doesn't work very well right now and needs addressed. Drastically increase training time per level of ship piloting skill?

I don't think you even know what you are asking for, or have not bothered to think about it enough to realize that not every ship has to be the rifter/punisher whatever. And considering that Black-Ops, Moms, Titans and a whole lot of possibly useful ships are not really balanced well - what do you think makes CCP want to ever revisit t1 frigates.

think about it

We're asking for more variety, less rifters/punishers being flown proportionally, by making other options more viable.

I don't think you even know what you are asking for, or have not bothered to think about it enough to realize that not every ship has to be the rifter/punisher whatever. And considering that Black-Ops, Moms, Titans and a whole lot of possibly useful ships are not really balanced well - what do you think makes CCP want to ever revisit t1 frigates.

think about it

because the number of people flying moms/titans/black ops versus t1 frigs/cruisers/battlecruisers

think harder about it

We're asking for more variety, less rifters/punishers being flown proportionally, by making other options more viable.

because the number of people flying moms/titans/black ops versus t1 frigs/cruisers/battlecruisers

think harder about it

The idea of the Tornado and its counterparts sounds interesting, if difficult to balance. However, it is depressing that you are taling about it as a tier 3 battlecruiser. Doesn't everyone accept that tiers are a bad idea?

The idea of tiers is to have a set of ships that are designed to be slightly less powerful and slightly cheaper. Tier 1 battlecruisers include the Cyclone and the Ferox. Tier 2 battlecruisers include the Hurricane and the Drake. The problem is that people are very rarely going to use tier 1 ships. Why use a bad ship, when there is a better version. We know that cost isn't a good balancing technique, this is particularly true when the cost difference is only 10-20% (after insurance, rigged and t2 fitted). CCP knows the exact statistics on how few people fly tier 1 ships, but we all know that you rarely see Feroxes and Cyclones, particularly compared to the tier 2 BCs.

Why deliberately design a ship to be weak and therefore unusable? Why not get rid of tiers and make all battlecruisers different, but equally powerful? (Same for battleships.) If the Cyclone was buffed, then it would be a viable alternative to the Hurricane for solo or very small gangs. People would have more ships to use, a greater choice of tactics and a wider variety of opponents.

Tiers just seem like a bad idea. Am I missing something? It would be a bit of a waste of time if these new tier 3 BCs just made the tier 2 ones obsolete and we still only really had 4 useful ships.

there are lots of options. . . 5 frigs per race, 2 AFs per race, an EAF per race, faction frigs, navy frigs. . . And, it has nothing to do with the tier system. Moreover, there will always be better and worse ships. You have variety or you have equality - not both.

Ruah I'm going to make this as simple as I can for you, because you're clearly not comprehending the discussion at hand.

In a given class, each ship is different, they have unique bonuses, these bonuses allude to them having different roles. For instance, a Maller is a good tanking ship, an Omen a good ganking ship, an Arbitrator is an EW platform with drones, and the Augoror is a logistics ship. These are different things.

Because of the tier system, the lower tier ships suffer from more restricted fitting space for their given tasks, less armour hp for what they do, they're slower, etc. Essentially, the lower tier ships are made worse at their jobs than the high tier ships are at theirs.

Does this make sense to you now?

We are asking that each ship be as good at it's job as the other ships are at their jobs. We are not asking for all ships to be good at one ship's job. (We don't want all frigates to be punishers, or rifters).

You see no sense in making the dozens of frigates that have zero use because of terrible slot layouts, a direct result of the tier system, actually useful?

Bumping this thread for renewed discussion now that Crucible is out and some of the balanced problems have been addressed.

I still think the tiering system needs looked at. One of the great advantages would be making t1 ships viable choices in fleet warfare, removing some of the barrier to entry (primarily cost, but also skill time) that keeps people out of low/null.

The tier system is great, it allows for more freedom of choice.

The tier system is great, it allows for more freedom of choice. Ships that are fail or op are that way because of lol ccp, nothing to do with tiering.

Getting rid of the teir system to add an extra 15+ ships that are currently not flown to the eve universe is probably the best thing CCP could spend their time on...

More variety more tactics more fun dont even need to spend the time designing new ships. Balancing might not go off perfect first time but who cares really. Worthy worthy thread

Giving more freedom of choice is exactly the point. Whens the last time you saw a Prophecy brought to a roam with serious intentions? Or an Omen? Or a Moa?

To be fair, there are balance problems IN ADDITION (not in place of) the issues with tiering- the Maller for example, or the Thorax. A few of these were addressed with Cruicible (like making the thorax more agile) so I thought I'd reopen the discussion.

The Maller needs a damage bonus. 5% dmg, 5% armor res per level -1 high +1 med. Or 5% assault missile dmg 5% armor res per level. AND some light drones in either case. The ship is incredibly bad with cruiser sized lasers in its current form.

Prophecy needs similar treatment.

I would love to see a 5% RoF bonus for HML/HAM on the maller and prophecy instead of the laser cap bonus, but let them keep their turret hardpoints so that AC fits are still possible. Would be interesting to do a similar thing with the punisher, but with rockets and light missiles.

So, Khanid ships.

Congratulations on picking two ships that suffer least under the tier system in the categories discussed. What incredibly role does the Prophecy play compared to the Harbinger that we have missed? Or the Inquisitor to the Punisher? Or any number of other examples.

I'm not going to argue example vs example. As a system, it's fundamentally flawed, nevermind individual balance issues. It's not necessarily flawed because of an imbalance of power either, moreso that it's making ships that already exist redundant for no sensible reason.

Who cares if Rifter is "best" T1 Frigate? Someone has to be "best." Delete it from the database and tomorrow a new "best" T1 Frigate would be crowned.

Not every ship can be made equally desirable/useful/whatever.

Getting rid of the teir system to add an extra 15+ ships that are currently not flown to the eve universe is probably the best thing CCP could spend their time on...

Getting rid of the teir system to add an extra 15+ ships that are currently not flown to the eve universe is probably the best thing CCP could spend their time on...

More variety more tactics more fun dont even need to spend the time designing new ships. Balancing might not go off perfect first time but who cares really. Worthy worthy thread

Bumping to front page with the best quote of the thread. Really, what else has this kind of reward/time ratio for dev resources?

Take the Proph and Harby into EFT and fit both for the biggest tank you can. The Harby will win, because of more slots and more PG. Don't let common wisdom fool you, the Harby outclasses the tier 1 in every way simply due to the increased space.

Strongly support bolded comment BTW.

I'm curious what industrial players think of tiers.

My thoughts are that the tier system does have some noteworthy merit to new players, but is far too pervasive at the moment, so I would suggest this change.

The starting point for balancing ships should be that all ships in a class are equally potent, albeit with their own specialities in that class. For instance, the Omen and Maller should be similarly useful, with the use of either depending on choice of gank or tank.


Secondly, once a class has approximately 3 ships in it, it should then be considered that a stepping stone into that class is required, and a low tier option or two should be added.


So using Amarr cruisers as the example, once the Maller, Omen, and Abitrator are balanced against each other, the Augoror would remain low-tier and low-cost.

Frigates (again, Amarr for simplicity), would have the Punisher, Inquisitor, and the Crucifier at the top, with equal potential. Beneath them would be the Magnate, Executioner, and Tormentor.
You'd have three viable combat options for older players, with their roles intact, an entry-level combat frigate (Executioner) as an upgrade for the burgeoning combat pilot, and similar entry-level ships for two other professions.

This is a well populated ship class, so it works out nicely. What about when the class has alot fewer ships in it?


Let's take battlecruisers as a further example; we have tier 1s and tier 2s, and essentially, tier 1s are useless as the training time and cost difference between them for anything other than a very cash-strapped and rushing new player is meaningless.

With the new 'logic', you would assume the class didn't have enough ships to warrant a low tier option (cruisers basically serve the bruisers in this way anyway), and balance them accordingly.

The cyclone, ferox, and prophecy are worthless shitbirds that are absolutely outperformed by their tier 2 counterparts.

Addendum: This post was written before the introduction of the tier 3 bruisers, and I don't think it's proper to discuss them in the same balancing drive as the tier 1 and 2 ships, they are essentially a different ship class in my opinion.

Actually the idea has been around for many years. Don't even know who originally posted on the old forums. It doesn't really matter though.

The idea makes too much sense with all the changes CCP made to the game easing the skill progression, ease of gaining isk, balancing changes, etc. There simply is no more reason to gimp over half the tech I frigs, cruisers, and half the BCs. When I started in 2006 it actually had a little meaning to it. But, with all the changes to the game, particularly as to new player experience, noone is any longer waiting to skill into or get enough isk for a higher tier ship. Buffing the underpowered ships in each class while promoting their roles would be much better than so many ideas for adding new ships.

The new exciting ships are already here, they just need some love

Actually the idea has been around for many years. Don't even know who originally posted on the old forums. It doesn't really matter though.

The idea makes too much sense with all the changes CCP made to the game easing the skill progression, ease of gaining isk, balancing changes, etc. There simply is no more reason to gimp over half the tech I frigs, cruisers, and half the BCs. When I started in 2006 it actually had a little meaning to it. But, with all the changes to the game, particularly as to new player experience, noone is any longer waiting to skill into or get enough isk for a higher tier ship. Buffing the underpowered ships in each class while promoting their roles would be much better than so many ideas for adding new ships.

The new exciting ships are already here, they just need some love

Yeeyy,

Read "tier" as "role"!
Problem solved.

Also:

Train and use the ships you like. If some seem useless for you, fly something else.

Give all tier one Battlecruisers MWD speed bonus - fast scouts, their new role.

I'm still getting to know this game, but it seems to me that a clearer separation of "Tier," a progression of the contemplation of ship design and combat tactics, from "Tech," a progression of technology, would make the game easier to get into without simply nerfing the skill (lower case intended) requirement to succeed.

So higher "Tier" ships would have ever more specialized roles within the game, while higher "Tech" ships take unique approaches through modules, stats, and bonuses not available to other vessels. The system for distinguishing different types of ships would then communicate something about their usage, and tie together similar ship types even across ship class and race.

Instead, players are left to sort out the difference between the advanced technology of a Tengu and the specialization of a Naga, two ships with vastly different capabilities and approaches to fitting. I think that letting the players sort this out for ourselves is fine, except that whatever consensus is reached about how to fit and fly these ships in a group setting is not reflected in-game, and sorting through 8 years of blogs and fan sites to find the up-to-date information needed to make a decision is very off-putting.

+1 for this thread. Sanity incarnate. I've been saying this for well over a year, and I've always gotten significant resistance. It's good to see common sense on the forums for once. (I'm... dreaming, of a badass... Bruuuuutix...)

Just a FYI
Brutix is already badass if you know how to fit it and when to use it.
Maybe the whole issue isn't the tiers as i see here.

The main issue is that most of you can't be bothered enough to put some effort and research, in order to success at the task at hand.

The problem isn't the ships but the fact that you want success effortlessly.

... And the problem is that you can't give it to a tier1 frig cuz it will obsolete orthodox rifter tacklers.

And the problem is that you can't give it to a tier1 frig cuz it will obsolete orthodox rifter tacklers((

I disagree,

The tier 3 is a support ship not a solo ship. Well some might sit on gates sniping.

Cyclone and Canes..

Its true i fly more Canes than Cyclones, but i disagree that the cane are so much better, for some purpose the cyclone are a hell lot better and to half the price.

15m, 30m and 54m (Cyclone, Hurricane, Tornado)

And each with their purpose. Solo an active tanked Cyclone problally have the bigges chance to survive.
Tornado can outrun a cane with basic speed, but it cant outrun a Cyclone. Circle is complete. (1800m/s, 1700m/s,1400m/s, Cyclone, Tornado, Hurricane Basic shield setups)

Tornado for supporting the hurricane with range DPS, Cyclones to catch those tier 3 and melt them. I know things are not black and white, but in princip.

Is there a proposition thread on this? I didn't see one.

Cyclone and Canes..

Its true i fly more Canes than Cyclones, but i disagree that the cane are so much better, for some purpose the cyclone are a hell lot better and to half the price.

15m, 30m and 54m (Cyclone, Hurricane, Tornado)

Weekend bump. Let's keep this discussion going.

Fingers crossed this will be top of the todo list for crucible2 : the recrucibleating

Actually at this point any response from CCP would be appreciated so that at least we know they have noticed us.

Getting rid of the teir system to add an extra 15+ ships that are currently not flown to the eve universe is probably the best thing CCP could spend their time on...

More variety more tactics more fun dont even need to spend the time designing new ships. Balancing might not go off perfect first time but who cares really. Worthy worthy thread

...can't believe some discussions move in circles for soooo long...

Kill the tiers, nerf / boost everything to the same, my ship doesn't have the fit the other does, this, that...

It's not Tiers that break ANYTHING...removing tiers = you want to remove variety. If you don't, then you wouldn't bother with tiers - its a number. i've never questioned myself : "hmm, should i buy frigate tier one or tier two? Tier 2 has to be better than 1 etc etc...
I read the stats, I pick what fits the role, or adapts closer to the role...done.

In some cases, higher tier ships make the lesser of their family obsolete: for example amarr BSs that look alike a lot (in role and skill set). Other races and classes are more straightforward in their roles, offering variety.

In the end, it's all opinions and noses and whatnot...everybody has his/her 2 cents of crap to throw around, and wiseguys with free time willing to argue in favor or against it.

+1. I support the elimination of tiering. It results in far too many hulls that are completely useless, even though they have a unique and viable concept.

Lets look at the t1 amarr frigates just cause I am most familiar with them.

Executioner: Very fast, cheap, low damage. Role as fast tackle. Unusable due to inadequate slots and PG/CPU
Crucifier: EWAR and fleet support. Unusable due to inadequate EHP and PG.
Inquisitor: High DPS with damage type selection. The only amarr frigate with these two traits. Unusable due to inadequate PG.
Punisher: Moderate DPS high tank. Has tier 3 fitting space. Coincidentally, is the only amarr t1 frig ever flown.

Notice a theme there? Lets get those alternate roles up and attractive, add variety and interest to the game and pvp tactics- all you gotta do is update the stupid tiering thing.

Ehe I don't know about you, but I use tier 1 BC/BS a lot for allt he right reasons because each ship is good at doing something. (granted ferox is meh)

So I see no sense in your reasoning.

agreed.

useless? procurer.
underused? ferox.

Big difference. If they made every ship equally as useful there would simply be 12 of the same battlecruiser. it would be like BSG online with different skins.

Go read the thread, particularly the big, well written posts, and then come back to post.