| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Semkhet
KR0M
The Red Skull
   |
Posted - 2006.07.17 12:07:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Semkhet on 17/07/2006 12:12:33
All I can say to the OP is that his proposal is way off being the "I-Win button", first because you adapt ships, gear, skills and tactics to the opponent you will face, and this prevents any universal design.
Second, because there's not enough interoperability and complementarity in that wing.
Third, you don't opt for T1 destroyers when these are afflicted by a generic 25% ROF penalty or a bomber with such little survavibility that you could be happy if it has the time to get a single volley to hit before being popped...
Would such a team take part in the tournament, your frig and dessy would be popped in the first 30 seconds at most. After 3 minutes, logistic cruiser popped, and this would leave 12 long minutes where your Vulture and CNR would be taken in pieces. You simply don't have enough variety of weapon systems nor firepower to have any chance against a good team. I'll kindly advise you to get back to the drawing board.
|
Semkhet
KR0M
The Red Skull
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 15:22:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Raid
Sadly this tournament will end with the richest on top. No doubt about that.
No doubt about that ?
Is Isk a cure for a missing brain ? NO
Does isk enhance your tactical flair ? NO
Does isk improve your experience ? NO
Does isk accelerate your skills training ? NO
You know who's loosing isk in the tournament ? The loosers, dude, not the winners... 
|
Semkhet
KR0M
The Red Skull
|
Posted - 2006.07.21 08:06:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Cl0nED
There comes a point where you have to wonder weither or not its "Worth" winning, if you had billions in bets on your alliance then maybe it be worth to keep on fighting but in the end we all have a good clue of who can afford to keep on losing really expensive ships.
This tournament is not really about winning isk in a pure risk/investment/benefits perspective. It's more about having fun among friends and try to design tactics working within an imposed fighting environment. Many teams lost before they even were moved to the arena, they just did'n knew it at that time  Conceptually, it's quite similar to chess: you need the ability to explore an exponential amount of possibilities, then restrain yourself to the most plausible paths, and finally think many steps ahead in order to maintain your options open.
|
| |
|