Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
|
LeMonde
|
Posted - 2006.10.07 16:29:00 -
[1]
We now have a near-complete set of rules for the third alliance tournament. Please remember that the list is NOT complete and there are still many issues to be decided upon.
Third Alliance Tournament - Rules (PFD)
Rules marked in red have not been decided upon, the rest are final.
On October 29th we will have a meeting with reps from each of the top 16 alliances from the last tournament. A total of 17 votes will be cast (one from CCP) on each issue and we will decide from there. Sign-ups will start three days later, on November 1st.
The top sixteen alliances from last time have priority when it comes to signing up. The sign-ups will last for 10 days, and on October 12th we will announce pairings + exact times.
|
|
Hakera
Anari Higard
|
Posted - 2006.10.07 16:46:00 -
[2]
brave allowing ecm and T2 ammo.
roll on the null/javelin war :p
certaintly ensured to make fights very fast anyway.
|
Darpz
Rampage Eternal
|
Posted - 2006.10.07 17:56:00 -
[3]
so guys Scorpian Eos Rook?
|
Valrandir
Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2006.10.07 18:52:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Valrandir on 07/10/2006 18:52:31 This third tournament will be quite different from the two others
-------------------------------- This has surpassed the Yarrdware specification and has been dubbed Uberware.
|
Siri Blue
Gallente Duvolle Laboratories Blue Division
|
Posted - 2006.10.07 18:58:00 -
[5]
Originally by: LeMonde We now have a near-complete set of rules for the third alliance tournament. Please remember that the list is NOT complete and there are still many issues to be decided upon.
Third Alliance Tournament - Rules (PFD)
Rules marked in red have not been decided upon, the rest are final.
On October 29th we will have a meeting with reps from each of the top 16 alliances from the last tournament. A total of 17 votes will be cast (one from CCP) on each issue and we will decide from there. Sign-ups will start three days later, on November 1st.
The top sixteen alliances from last time have priority when it comes to signing up. The sign-ups will last for 10 days, and on October 12th we will announce pairings + exact times.
October 12th? You mean November or December??
|
|
LeMonde
|
Posted - 2006.10.07 19:04:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Siri Blue
Originally by: LeMonde We now have a near-complete set of rules for the third alliance tournament. Please remember that the list is NOT complete and there are still many issues to be decided upon.
Third Alliance Tournament - Rules (PFD)
Rules marked in red have not been decided upon, the rest are final.
On October 29th we will have a meeting with reps from each of the top 16 alliances from the last tournament. A total of 17 votes will be cast (one from CCP) on each issue and we will decide from there. Sign-ups will start three days later, on November 1st.
The top sixteen alliances from last time have priority when it comes to signing up. The sign-ups will last for 10 days, and on October 12th we will announce pairings + exact times.
October 12th? You mean November or December??
November, fixed
|
|
Siri Blue
Gallente Duvolle Laboratories Blue Division
|
Posted - 2006.10.07 19:07:00 -
[7]
Hm, the purpose of a point system is to increase diversity in the different fights...sooo...limiting the number of pilots to 5 would appear to be a bad idea...
|
Trevedian
Amarr KR0M The Red Skull
|
Posted - 2006.10.07 21:58:00 -
[8]
Sweet, I lub it...
Sex0r > you're bounty turns me on.. you seem like the kind of amarrian to dominate me
|
Kendar
Gallente 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2006.10.07 22:13:00 -
[9]
PFD ?
|
Baun
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2006.10.07 22:44:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Baun on 07/10/2006 22:46:43 I think that faction modules, as per the last tournament, should not be allowed and further that pirate implants should not be allowed.
Anything that can make the competition more skill based instead of isk based is, in my opinion preferable. The early rounds will be completely dominated by the alliances that spend the most isk on implants and modules.
If the aim of the competition is to have the skill of the few alliances that spend tons and tons of isk determine who wins then the current rules are great.
If the aim of the competition is to have the skill of every team determines who wins then the use of faction mods and implants needs to be cut back, not expanded.
Edit: I think allowing T2 and Faction ammo is good in either case. Faction ammo isn't such a big deal and being able judge what t2 ammo to use when is skill based.
The Enemy's Gate is Down
|
|
|
LeMonde
|
Posted - 2006.10.07 22:49:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Baun Edited by: Baun on 07/10/2006 22:46:43 I think that faction modules, as per the last tournament, should not be allowed and further that pirate implants should not be allowed.
Anything that can make the competition more skill based instead of isk based is, in my opinion preferable. The early rounds will be completely dominated by the alliances that spend the most isk on implants and modules.
If the aim of the competition is to have the skill of the few alliances that spend tons and tons of isk determine who wins then the current rules are great.
If the aim of the competition is to have the skill of every team determines who wins then the use of faction mods and implants needs to be cut back, not expanded.
Edit: I think allowing T2 and Faction ammo is good in either case. Faction ammo isn't such a big deal and being able judge what t2 ammo to use when is skill based.
You just noticed the first thing missing in there. There are no plans to change faction modules, they are still restricted.
|
|
Baun
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2006.10.07 23:54:00 -
[12]
Originally by: LeMonde
Originally by: Baun Edited by: Baun on 07/10/2006 22:46:43 I think that faction modules, as per the last tournament, should not be allowed and further that pirate implants should not be allowed.
Anything that can make the competition more skill based instead of isk based is, in my opinion preferable. The early rounds will be completely dominated by the alliances that spend the most isk on implants and modules.
If the aim of the competition is to have the skill of the few alliances that spend tons and tons of isk determine who wins then the current rules are great.
If the aim of the competition is to have the skill of every team determines who wins then the use of faction mods and implants needs to be cut back, not expanded.
Edit: I think allowing T2 and Faction ammo is good in either case. Faction ammo isn't such a big deal and being able judge what t2 ammo to use when is skill based.
You just noticed the first thing missing in there. There are no plans to change faction modules, they are still restricted.
Thats good! ;p
Now how about banning pirate implants. You could RP it by allowing players to install jump clones in a concord station or something so they can get into a new body with different implants for the tournament.
The Enemy's Gate is Down
|
DJ Xod
Minmatar Eve Radio Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.10.08 00:56:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Baun Edited by: Baun on 07/10/2006 22:46:43Thats good! ;p
Now how about banning pirate implants. You could RP it by allowing players to install jump clones in a concord station or something so they can get into a new body with different implants for the tournament.
There were two issues brought up surrounding this:
1. The amount of time that it would take to check each pilot.
2. How do we handle pilots that are maxed on their jump clones?
I'm not certain, but there might be other implications surrounding this that may not make it possible. TBH - I would like to see them taken out as well, but at the same time I have a clear understanding of the constraints we are working with.
http://www.eve-radio.com |
Baun
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2006.10.08 01:32:00 -
[14]
Originally by: DJ Xod
Originally by: Baun Edited by: Baun on 07/10/2006 22:46:43Thats good! ;p
Now how about banning pirate implants. You could RP it by allowing players to install jump clones in a concord station or something so they can get into a new body with different implants for the tournament.
There were two issues brought up surrounding this:
1. The amount of time that it would take to check each pilot.
2. How do we handle pilots that are maxed on their jump clones?
I'm not certain, but there might be other implications surrounding this that may not make it possible. TBH - I would like to see them taken out as well, but at the same time I have a clear understanding of the constraints we are working with.
Lets continue the discussion in the other thread. I made my posts here not seeing that thread.
I don't think it could take very long to check each pilot though. Its just one more step after checking their fitting. The last constraint is troubling but it could be dealt with, it just might be very time consuming after the fact.
The Enemy's Gate is Down
|
jamesw
Omniscient Order
|
Posted - 2006.10.08 07:46:00 -
[15]
Nice Rules <3
The only thing I am unsure about in there is why Webbers and painters are limited, yet ECM is not?? ECM can balance out the issues caused by ships with more than one webber / painter, so imo there should be a bit of consistency there.
Otherwise, I love it. It will make for some really interesting tactics and setups...
Good luck to all who apply --
NEW Vid: Domi For the Win! |
Marnix
Gallente Shinra Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2006.10.08 09:52:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Marnix on 08/10/2006 09:56:49
Quote: If both teams have destroyed equal amounts of ships, we will go to assault frigate duels. The duels are best 2 out of 3 and follow the same fitting restrictions as the tournament. Any member of the team can participate, but each one in no more than one duel.
Regarding this. What happens in the (however unlikely) scenario that a team doesnt have 3 pilots capable of flying Assault Frigates? Might seem like a silly question, but i want to be sure.
Besides that i dont see the reasoning in limiting webs and painters, especially this severely. Atleast allow a ship to fit a web AND a painter... Allowing only one of the two per ship is an insult to Minmatar Recons, who can only use ONE module that they get a bonus to? (As opposed to, f.e, 7 for the Falcon.)
Stay the fck away from my sig, thx.
|
5n4keyes
Caldari Sacred Templars DeStInY.
|
Posted - 2006.10.08 10:46:00 -
[17]
Question, if someone for example wanted to use a faction frigate, what does it come under in the points table? eg, t1 or t2 frig?
|
Ithildin
Gallente The Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.10.08 11:34:00 -
[18]
It would be very nice if more logistics ships were present. They are far from the same class as the other T2 cruisers, though, so how about treating them like T1 battlecruisers in terms of cost and limitation? (Note: damage output on these are laughable, speed and survivability is comparable to assault frigs, remote repairing is in the order of 100 to 200 HP/s sustainable depending on speed module running or not)
ECM - Well, better be only one module per ship. It's still going to ruin the fun in most fights. Just remember the first tourny you staged on FF, where the one with most and first ECM won.
T2 ammo - Tuxford was working on a fix for these, and that fix had better be in by the time of the tourny. T2 ammo has a high tendency to absolutely ruin ship balance.
Important: If the number of ships are counted in this format, it will favour the team with the fewest and most expensive (point-wise) ships!
I know that I am commenting this on black-marked rules, but it's important to review. Example: Team A - Machariel and Absolution only. Team B - Astarte, 2 Brutix, 4 Punishers. Team A pops the four Punishers, but in the end lose both ships. According to the rules, Team A, inspite of having been wiped out, has killed four ships. Team B, inspite of having 42% survivability and remaining, lose the fight since they only killed two ships. This system favours those who field few, high-point ships. If the rules allowed for a POINT system instead, Team B would win since they killed 20 points and Team A only 4 points. This system favour neither ship setup. There are two more systems for counting wins that I can come up with on the fly (surviving points and surviving ships), but neither feel intuitive.
So, since you are using a point-system for constructing teams, how about using a point system for scoring as well? - Three years old |
jamesw
Omniscient Order
|
Posted - 2006.10.08 11:44:00 -
[19]
How many points are Indy's worth. Is there a distinction between t1 and t2?
--
NEW Vid: Domi For the Win! |
Trevedian
Amarr KR0M The Red Skull
|
Posted - 2006.10.08 12:09:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Ithildin It would be very nice if more logistics ships were present. They are far from the same class as the other T2 cruisers, though, so how about treating them like T1 battlecruisers in terms of cost and limitation? (Note: damage output on these are laughable, speed and survivability is comparable to assault frigs, remote repairing is in the order of 100 to 200 HP/s sustainable depending on speed module running or not)
ECM - Well, better be only one module per ship. It's still going to ruin the fun in most fights. Just remember the first tourny you staged on FF, where the one with most and first ECM won.
T2 ammo - Tuxford was working on a fix for these, and that fix had better be in by the time of the tourny. T2 ammo has a high tendency to absolutely ruin ship balance.
Important: If the number of ships are counted in this format, it will favour the team with the fewest and most expensive (point-wise) ships!
I know that I am commenting this on black-marked rules, but it's important to review. Example: Team A - Machariel and Absolution only. Team B - Astarte, 2 Brutix, 4 Punishers. Team A pops the four Punishers, but in the end lose both ships. According to the rules, Team A, inspite of having been wiped out, has killed four ships. Team B, inspite of having 42% survivability and remaining, lose the fight since they only killed two ships. This system favours those who field few, high-point ships. If the rules allowed for a POINT system instead, Team B would win since they killed 20 points and Team A only 4 points. This system favour neither ship setup. There are two more systems for counting wins that I can come up with on the fly (surviving points and surviving ships), but neither feel intuitive.
So, since you are using a point-system for constructing teams, how about using a point system for scoring as well?
Are you serious that you think Logistic ships would make the tournament more interesting? Yeah the extra tanking would be SOOOO fun to watch (they'll be jammed anyway, so they won't be able to remote rep)
Its a T2 Cruiser and should be treated as such, teams used them in place of a HAC or Recon ship last time and won so get over it...
Since it doesn't say 1 ECM module per ship you can expect people to fit as much EW as they want... EW can be countered in many ways, so you gotta be prepared for it.
In your illustration with the Astarte, 2 Brutix, 4 Punishers, you forgot to read the rules (5 Ships Allowed Max per round, 7 on a team). But I think Lemonde prolly will be going with points of ships killed anyway but we'll have to see.
With regards to the 2 of 3 Assault Frigate tiebreakers, I understood it as you only need one pilot with an AF and he can fly it 3 times, you don't need 3 AF pilots.
Now even when you see what ships the other team is flying, there is no guarantee that you know how they are fitted or what their tactics will be...
Sex0r > you're bounty turns me on.. you seem like the kind of amarrian to dominate me
|
|
Morning Maniac
Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2006.10.08 12:17:00 -
[21]
Just let go of the 5 pilots thing and then I can take my entire corp in industrials (0 points ftw)
MM
http://eve.xonectic.com/forum/(out of game) EVE University commercial |
Ithildin
Gallente The Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.10.08 14:49:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Ithildin on 08/10/2006 14:50:50
Originally by: Trevedian Are you serious that you think Logistic ships would make the tournament more interesting? Yeah the extra tanking would be SOOOO fun to watch (they'll be jammed anyway, so they won't be able to remote rep)
Its a T2 Cruiser and should be treated as such, teams used them in place of a HAC or Recon ship last time and won so get over it...
Since it doesn't say 1 ECM module per ship you can expect people to fit as much EW as they want... EW can be countered in many ways, so you gotta be prepared for it.
In your illustration with the Astarte, 2 Brutix, 4 Punishers, you forgot to read the rules (5 Ships Allowed Max per round, 7 on a team). But I think Lemonde prolly will be going with points of ships killed anyway but we'll have to see.
With regards to the 2 of 3 Assault Frigate tiebreakers, I understood it as you only need one pilot with an AF and he can fly it 3 times, you don't need 3 AF pilots.
Now even when you see what ships the other team is flying, there is no guarantee that you know how they are fitted or what their tactics will be...
So I was sitting on the train contemplating my post and realized that someone was bound to be stupid enough to nitpick. It's hypothetical and illustrative, not actual.
- Revised example - Team A - 2 ships, 18 points. Team B - 5 ships, 24 points. Result: Team A kills 3 ships for 5 points value. Team B kills 2 ships for 20 points value. Team A is the winner inspite of having been wiped out, and inspite of Team B having just as many ships as Team A STARTED with and MORE points than Team A START with.
As for logistics ships, yes I'd like to see more of them. All they can do is remote tank, and no they won't be jammed, they'll be shot down and killed (every single logistics ship that's been used before has proven severely ineffective).
It doesn't say one ECM per ship, I know. That's why I wrote that it had better be, since I consider ECM currently to be game breaking AND BORING even outside tournaments since they make battles completely ONE SIDED.
As for Assault Frigates, I never commented the tiebreaker, so please take better care when quoting. But since you got so upset that I hadn't read the rules, I'll take the oppurtonity to scream at you, incidentally in exactly the same manner you did. What a coincidence... You forgot to read the rules (Any member of the team can participate, but each one in no more than one duel.)!
Geez. Have some coffe and wake up before posting. - Three years old |
ookke
|
Posted - 2006.10.09 14:56:00 -
[23]
unlimited ECM will make the tournament a big joke. I can already imagine ravens with 5x ECM II and armortank... or even worse, ECM-CNR.
24 points and 5 ships will be more than able to permalock up the other team while running logistics bots on it's own team. How will this make the matches any shorter or interesting, when the only dmg dealt is a couple of attack drones that were assigned before the owner got jammed?
It will also be a big lottery about who has damps, who has ecm, who has more sensor boosters, who has eccm, who has better luck on jams instead of a match about piloting skill and setups.
|
Darpz
Rampage Eternal
|
Posted - 2006.10.09 15:03:00 -
[24]
yup unlimited ECM is bad 1 per ship kinda made sence though
|
|
LeMonde
|
Posted - 2006.10.09 15:55:00 -
[25]
Originally by: ookke unlimited ECM will make the tournament a big joke. I can already imagine ravens with 5x ECM II and armortank... or even worse, ECM-CNR.
24 points and 5 ships will be more than able to permalock up the other team while running logistics bots on it's own team. How will this make the matches any shorter or interesting, when the only dmg dealt is a couple of attack drones that were assigned before the owner got jammed?
It will also be a big lottery about who has damps, who has ecm, who has more sensor boosters, who has eccm, who has better luck on jams instead of a match about piloting skill and setups.
I think you're giving too much credit to ECM. There are several ship setups where you have three big ships and 2-4 extra points for Tech 1 frigates or destroyers. ECCM projectors/remote sensor boosters can be very useful on those
|
|
ookke
|
Posted - 2006.10.09 17:19:00 -
[26]
Originally by: LeMonde
I think you're giving too much credit to ECM. There are several ship setups where you have three big ships and 2-4 extra points for Tech 1 frigates or destroyers. ECCM projectors/remote sensor boosters can be very useful on those
Don't see how fitting ECCM will help against dampeners, so you still have the lottery between fitting eccm/eccm projectors/sensor boosters/remote sensor boosters/your own EW. On top of that, an EW support griffin will last for about 0.4 seconds with t2 missiles being used.
I don't mind choices in ship setups, but having to select EW and anti-EW modules on random and hope you get lucky doesn't sound tempting.
|
NebulousBlur
Minmatar Unknown Shoe Corp. SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.10.09 22:19:00 -
[27]
I'm curious about why target painting and webbing is restricted, but ECM and dampening isn't? Are there restrictions on target painting drones and webber drones?
My first gut reaction to reading the rules was fear especially with ECM and dampening allowed. But when I actually looke at what can be fielded with 24-28 points across 5 pilots I'm not quite as worried.
I also agree with the others about the time limit - if the time limit is reached, it should be resolved using the point values of the destroyed ships, not just the number of ships.
|
Swanic
|
Posted - 2006.10.10 00:24:00 -
[28]
t1 frigates includes faction frigates at 1point per? |
Nifel
Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.10.10 02:01:00 -
[29]
It feels like I'm missing something here. Are you supposed to have a 5-man team? With only 24 points you're extremely limited in what you can do.
For example: Tier1 BS + T1 BC + T1 Cruiser + T1 Destroyer + T1 Frig = 23 points. That leaves a whole 1 point to play around with. Start mixing in T2 and you'll be sorry you even bothered trying. Even limiting the number of players makes it nigh impossible to come up with anything even remotely interesting.
Say for example I only go with a 3 man team. Tier1 BS + T1 BC + T1 Cruiser = 20 points. Wee... 4 points to play around with. Now I can choose to go with T2 BC and T2 Cruiser but still be left with a Tier1 BS which doesn't leave that much to desire. Going for a faction BS will gimp just about any team because you're left with extremely few choices even with just a 3man team.
"When I die I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandpa. Not yelling and screaming like the passengers in his car." RKK Ranking: (MIN14) |
jamesw
Omniscient Order
|
Posted - 2006.10.10 02:35:00 -
[30]
Originally by: ookke
Originally by: LeMonde
I think you're giving too much credit to ECM. There are several ship setups where you have three big ships and 2-4 extra points for Tech 1 frigates or destroyers. ECCM projectors/remote sensor boosters can be very useful on those
Don't see how fitting ECCM will help against dampeners, so you still have the lottery between fitting eccm/eccm projectors/sensor boosters/remote sensor boosters/your own EW. On top of that, an EW support griffin will last for about 0.4 seconds with t2 missiles being used.
I don't mind choices in ship setups, but having to select EW and anti-EW modules on random and hope you get lucky doesn't sound tempting.
Its not random. You know who you are fighting in all rounds, and you can get a pretty good idea of what they will field based on their previous fights. The further you go in the tournament, the more opportunity you have to study your adversaries. WIN!
--
NEW Vid: Domi For the Win! |
|
LordQ
Caldari Warlords Corp
|
Posted - 2006.10.10 05:09:00 -
[31]
Well Dampening wont be a big problem cause teams start 30km away from each other. One sensor booster II and you might need several dampeners to cut targetting range below 30km.
LordQ
|
MECTO
|
Posted - 2006.10.10 06:09:00 -
[32]
very good rules, will be interesting
|
Shin Ra
BURN EDEN
|
Posted - 2006.10.10 07:54:00 -
[33]
Good choice of rules. Should be a lot more interesting this year. Almost makes me want to enter.
|
Silvero
Gallente Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.10.10 23:01:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Silvero on 10/10/2006 23:04:11 oops wrong thread, moving it to disc...
|
Constantinee
Caldari Eradication Defined
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 02:21:00 -
[35]
Well i cant open the file on my computer guess i need to figure out why i cant probably just the format. In other words im reading what you all say and imho ECM is not fit for a tourny like this. Yes it can be counterd by eccm but if you have 4 hsips trying to jam you one eccm countermeasure wont really do much. wont really comment on anything else until i can actually open the file and see what the rules really are. anyway sad about the pairing dates i honestly hope those are not the match dates. if not any news on when those will be? hope its on a christmas time then i wont have to skip my classes for college everyday to watch the tourny :D.
Want a Cheap sig? |
Ithildin
Gallente The Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 09:46:00 -
[36]
Originally by: LeMonde
Originally by: ookke unlimited ECM will make the tournament a big joke. I can already imagine ravens with 5x ECM II and armortank... or even worse, ECM-CNR.
24 points and 5 ships will be more than able to permalock up the other team while running logistics bots on it's own team. How will this make the matches any shorter or interesting, when the only dmg dealt is a couple of attack drones that were assigned before the owner got jammed?
It will also be a big lottery about who has damps, who has ecm, who has more sensor boosters, who has eccm, who has better luck on jams instead of a match about piloting skill and setups.
I think you're giving too much credit to ECM. There are several ship setups where you have three big ships and 2-4 extra points for Tech 1 frigates or destroyers. ECCM projectors/remote sensor boosters can be very useful on those
You are forgetting that a ship with ECCM projectors, especially a frigate with such, is essentially without protection and a free kill. This might seem like a semi-good idea, let the enemies waste the first few rounds on the frigates and you get an early advantage, but it's not. "Fights are limited to 15 minutes in the first round. After that the fight will be stopped and whichever alliance has more kills will be declared victor." Or, in other words, the team with ECCM frigates will be giving free win-points away to the other team. You do not even have a rules clausule which states what conditions would stop a fight before 15 minutes!
Oh, and by the way, he's not giving too much credit to ECM. It is a combat ruiner - especially on the fun-and-exciting side. It creates frustration and angst, you can not do anything about it (no, ECCM doesn't work well enough - barely comparable to sensor booster and doesn't even give a possitive side effect). That alone should be reason enough to skip ECM from the tournament - they aren't entertaining. - Three years old |
Mextor
Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2006.10.11 12:43:00 -
[37]
Question. how will you be contacting the alliances to find out who the reps will be. Full Stats
|
Derran
Minmatar Khumatari Holdings Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2006.10.12 14:57:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Ithildin
You are forgetting that a ship with ECCM projectors, especially a frigate with such, is essentially without protection and a free kill. This might seem like a semi-good idea, let the enemies waste the first few rounds on the frigates and you get an early advantage, but it's not. "Fights are limited to 15 minutes in the first round. After that the fight will be stopped and whichever alliance has more kills will be declared victor." Or, in other words, the team with ECCM frigates will be giving free win-points away to the other team. You do not even have a rules clausule which states what conditions would stop a fight before 15 minutes!
Oh, and by the way, he's not giving too much credit to ECM. It is a combat ruiner - especially on the fun-and-exciting side. It creates frustration and angst, you can not do anything about it (no, ECCM doesn't work well enough - barely comparable to sensor booster and doesn't even give a possitive side effect). That alone should be reason enough to skip ECM from the tournament - they aren't entertaining.
So just put them on a tougher ship. The points system allows you not have to use frigates. The projected ECCM modules can boost your sensor strength by 120% or so depending on the module. It would be alot like logistics helping out each other. And anyone using ECM is also going to be sacrificing something on their ship. If they do a Scorpion or Raven, they sacrifice on their shield tank. They can try to armor tank but they won't do it as well as most other ships. Then you also have to look at FoF missiles or drones that may be already deployed when the target began the aggression.
|
Sir JoJo
Minmatar Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.10.13 09:26:00 -
[39]
havent read all replys, but only thing i have to say
Rules are a Disgrace to the minmatar race especially there recons ships, if ecm is allowed why then restrcitions on webs and painters. u coulse just have made a rule of no minmatar recons allowed.
*snip* Don't be nasty [email protected] to discuss mod - Cathath i am not nasty |
Ikvar
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2006.10.13 11:17:00 -
[40]
This just gets stupider every time they do it
|
|
Elve Sorrow
Amarr Shinra Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2006.10.13 17:49:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Derran So just put them on a tougher ship. The points system allows you not have to use frigates. The projected ECCM modules can boost your sensor strength by 120% or so depending on the module. It would be alot like logistics helping out each other. And anyone using ECM is also going to be sacrificing something on their ship. If they do a Scorpion or Raven, they sacrifice on their shield tank. They can try to armor tank but they won't do it as well as most other ships. Then you also have to look at FoF missiles or drones that may be already deployed when the target began the aggression.
Technically, youre right. There is one thing about that though: ECM, while requiring sacrifices, always helps. Wether the other side has ECCM or not, it does its job. ECCM does fck all though if your enemy doesnt use ECM.
Which is a fairly important difference.
|
Shin Ra
BURN EDEN
|
Posted - 2006.10.14 08:40:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Sir JoJo havent read all replys, but only thing i have to say
Rules are a Disgrace to the minmatar race especially there recons ships, if ecm is allowed why then restrcitions on webs and painters. u coulse just have made a rule of no minmatar recons allowed.
Yeah I think your right. Before ECM was allowed it made some sense. But not its kind of a pointless rule. I think it is to try an stop the SMASH style hold them at range, kill their small ships and win on points count.
|
Mebrithiel Ju'wien
Minmatar Blood Inquisition Sani Khal'Vecna
|
Posted - 2006.10.14 15:47:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Shin Ra Yeah I think your right. Before ECM was allowed it made some sense. But not its kind of a pointless rule. I think it is to try an stop the SMASH style hold them at range, kill their small ships and win on points count.
Hmmm, sounds right. Perhaps with allout ECM being allowed in, the rules could be looked at in regards to painters and webbers again.
A minmatar recon setup squad is gonna suffer to a jamming squad just as bad as any other.
|
H3licon
|
Posted - 2006.10.15 01:09:00 -
[44]
The .pdf was written by someone who spells "ammount" instead of "amount". That's scary.
|
Sir JoJo
Minmatar Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.10.15 04:21:00 -
[45]
Originally by: H3licon The .pdf was written by someone who spells "ammount" instead of "amount". That's scary.
or the .pdf is written by a human whos able to do error's such as mis click on hes keyboard, thats what makes us humans
The Rules is a disgrace for Minmatar |
Zaethiel
Murder-Death-Kill Blood Raiders Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.10.15 06:13:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Zaethiel on 15/10/2006 06:13:29 I would still like to see the point system looked at a little more. Maybe you could revise the ship point system more by uping the maximum to 50 points and raising all the ship points accordingly. It would give you more maneuverability in setting restrictions on the ships used.
Example would be: (50 points max) Faction Battleships ......................22 Tier 3 Battleship ........................20 Tier 2 Battleship ........................19 Tier 1 Battleship ........................18 T2 Battle cruiser ........................16 T2 Cruiser ...............................14 T1 Battle cruiser ........................12 T1 Cruiser ...............................11 T2 Frigate ...............................10 T2 Destroyer .............................9 T1 Destroyer .............................8 T1 Frigate ...............................8
i just threw that example together really fast, but you can see how more flexible and precise you can limit ship combos rather than just starting at 12 and counting down to 1. _________________________________________
|
Ramuh
BURN EDEN
|
Posted - 2006.10.16 12:28:00 -
[47]
The points system is fine. It forces people who want to field the best ships to have fewer numbers, which is quite fair imho.
60km radius is fine. It should be marked by something and no stupid debris in the way.
Five pilots is the most you can field without resorting to frig swarms (which would be interesting actually). I think LeMonde has got the number right here. It should prompt people to think out of the box and acutally come up with cool stratagies.
T2 ammo being allowed, I'm 50/50 on this one. On one hand it will allow smaller ships to get nicer damamge, but it may make the raven too uber (one shotting frigs with precision cruise). Either way, people loose out, so I would say keep it in. BUT!!!! : If u take out t2 missles, you have to take out t2 drones.
All ECM, dampners, tracking disruptors should be allowed as this a pvp tournament not a who can tank the best competition.
Cap boosters should be allowed as they will almost certainly not last for 15 minutes and therefor are not i-win buttons. I don't agree that ships should be able to give each other cap booster charges by dropping cans tho.
|
Zaethiel
Murder-Death-Kill Blood Raiders Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.10.16 14:10:00 -
[48]
Who needs to tank when you can jam everyone =) _________________________________________
|
Angeldust
Omega Fleet Enterprises Xelas Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.10.16 22:00:00 -
[49]
Is it just me or is there no rule preventing podkilling this time ?
|
Logan Fyreite
Vexillum Nox Rogue Method Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.10.17 17:53:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Sir JoJo havent read all replys, but only thing i have to say
Rules are a Disgrace to the minmatar race especially there recons ships, if ecm is allowed why then restrcitions on webs and painters. u coulse just have made a rule of no minmatar recons allowed.
Can we Minmatars get some clarification here. How is it that every other race comes into this with no restrictions but we get slapped with the worst. I guess on the good side this will drive the prices of Huginn and Rapier down (I like that idea). I just want a mod to give the reasoning behind this. There has been no response as to why exactly webs and TP's are being restricted. With all the ECM gobbledy**** how are Painters and webs going to make such a huge difference?
please?
|
|
Malicious Wraith
The Dark Side of the Moon
|
Posted - 2006.10.17 20:49:00 -
[51]
Edited by: Malicious Wraith on 17/10/2006 20:49:52 These rules are excellent as they are put down, I am against any modifications.
Except for one thing:
If pirate implants are allowed, no podkilling.
Better if you just provide jump clones to everyone to remove that factor, but I am going to take a guess that ccp really wants pirate implants by the fact that you didnt leave it red, and in effect open for discussion ^.- ----------------------------------------
|
Ithildin
Gallente The Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.10.18 19:56:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Malicious Wraith Edited by: Malicious Wraith on 17/10/2006 20:49:52 These rules are excellent as they are put down, I am against any modifications.
Except for one thing:
If pirate implants are allowed, no podkilling.
Better if you just provide jump clones to everyone to remove that factor, but I am going to take a guess that ccp really wants pirate implants by the fact that you didnt leave it red, and in effect open for discussion ^.-
Actually, if you review the rules you'll see that if you pod-kill someone else, the least that happens is your team gets disqualified. More severe punishments if it was clearly intentional. At least, that's what's happened in every other tournament so far. - What am I listening to? |
Valrandir
Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2006.10.19 17:36:00 -
[53]
Stop whining and build up the best possible team setup according to the current ruleset. Then get in the tournament doing your best to win.
ECM is allowed, so what? It's the same pro and con for both teams, and someone's going to win.
-------------------------------- This has surpassed the Yarrdware specification and has been dubbed Uberware.
|
Valrandir
Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2006.10.19 17:40:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Angeldust Is it just me or is there no rule preventing podkilling this time ?
Pod kill is not allowed.
-------------------------------- This has surpassed the Yarrdware specification and has been dubbed Uberware.
|
Flipidy Floo
|
Posted - 2006.10.22 21:40:00 -
[55]
I hate ECM being allowed, now you know every team will have to have it and it's going to be sooo boring.
Also, the points are too low, it's focused to much around small ship combat. If it does stay that low, you need to allow more than one battleship. It's not allowing for much diversity otherwise. Also, Battleships generally have the best resistance to ECM, so they have a better chance of surviving with backups than other ships do. It at least balances that factor a bit.
T2 ammo is cool, it should have been allowed last time.
cap injectors should be allowed only if t2 ammo is. It'll balance the tank and gank factors.
|
Robet Katrix
Beagle Corp R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2006.10.23 21:47:00 -
[56]
t2 ammo and ECM. its gonna be helluva interesting. the CNR's will now have javs though :( i feel sorry for the dictors.
the restrictions on TP's and Webs are understandable, but by allowing t2 ammo you remove the need to limit them.
its gonna be a caldari mess nonetheless. i wonder if someone will actually try and use rage torps?
lotta possibilities
|
Trevedian
Amarr KR0M The Red Skull
|
Posted - 2006.10.23 22:18:00 -
[57]
Edited by: Trevedian on 23/10/2006 22:24:59
I'd like to see a few more points (25-27) but otherwise I'm fine with the rules as they are. No matter what the rules are, people will adapt and EW will make it very unpredictable.
I heard BOB (Band Of Blobbers) was threatening to boycott because EW added too much variation to the mix and they couldn't use the same boring 1 trick pony they used last time. (/emote sniffles)
People will not be able to fit turtle tanks like last time if they are using EW/ Counter EW, and if they don't fit counter EW... There goes their ability to remote rep :)
I am a little worried about the EW changes happening so close to the tourney, but I won't whine or threaten a boycott (like some), I'll adapt...
Sex0r > you're bounty turns me on.. you seem like the kind of amarrian to dominate me
|
Blacklight
Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.10.24 23:27:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Trevedian ..meh..
Trevidian, classy as always.
Having won the last two tournaments your little digs are not going to do much other than go sailing off unheaded in the wind.
We have nothing to prove. The fact that you need to bring schoolboy level jibes to this thread suggests you feel that you have.
You are correct in one thing though, we are considering whether to participate or not. Which way the decisions go regarding the outstanding items highlighted by LeMonde will help us make our decision.
However, we won't be 'boycotting' the tournament in some drama queen-esque type fashion as you are attempting to suggest, we will simply choose not to participate for our own reasons.
It is my hope that the sensible people on the committee deciding the final rules will come to a decision that makes us want to participate. Win or lose it would be very dissappointing not to be there to defend our title.
As far as the rules themselves are concerned I think there is a very simple decision that the organisers and rules committee have to address and that is the question of what the purpose of the tournament is - what is the vision that the tournament is attempting to achieve? Is the tournament to be a measure of PvP skill or is the tournament to be an entertainment spectacle or is the tournament to be a reflection of an alliances strength across all aspects of the game?
If the tournament is meant to be a measure of PvP skill then there should be no fitting restrictions in terms of number or type of modules. Fighting should be as close to Tranquility actual as possible but have a relatively even playing field.
If the tournament is to be an entertainment spectacle then excessive tanking and EW should be restricted. Fights need to be glorious, full of explosions and have little chance of reaching a stalemate.
If the tournament is to be a reflection of an alliance's strength across all aspects of the game then there should be no restriction in terms of expense and type of modules allowed.
I would prefer, personally, a version of either the first or second vision for the tournament.
In the case of the first I would, if allowing EW, remove all restrictions in terms of module numbers, module types, ship types and ammunition types with the exception of not allowing faction/complex/officer modules i.e. allow the full variety of ships and fittings found on Tranquility but not allowing alliances to buy a win. Let combat in the tournament be as close as possible to normal gameplay but with the points system left in place to challenge all round knowledge of PvP tactics, complementary ship selection and therefore teamwork.
In the case of the second I would not allow EW and I would restrict remote tanking. Both EW and excessive tanking lead to fights potentially lasting an eternity which is no good for entertainment, coming to no satisfactory conclusion which is again not good for entertainment or lastly introduce a random factor in EW. Whilst on the surface the introduction of a random factor such as the EW dice rolling mechanism seems entertaining I believe it will potentially lead to very boring and lengthy fights (jam and counterjam, little damage, reduction in exploderisations etc.), it will promote chance vs skill therefore belittling achievement and lastly will lead to a lot of sore losers blaming bad luck.
The third suggestion I made regarding zero restrictions on the ships and modules allowed would simply allow an alliance to buy it's way to a win. I would not support that vision for the tournament despite the fact that a totally 'gloves off' and 'everything allowed' set of rules would more truly reflect on a whole alliance's PvP capabilities in game terms and their relative pecking order on Tranquility. The loss of the ability for a smaller, less well off or less recognised alliance to knock one of the big boys off their pedestal is definitely not worth the realistic reflection of life on TQ though, in my opinion.
|
Derrios
Dirty Deeds Corp. Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2006.10.26 04:48:00 -
[59]
not sure if this has been adressed. We get 4 points to additionally add throughout the whole tourney. Can these points be split between multiple fights or all 4 at once? -----------------------------------------------
Originally by: wierchas noobhunter hmm blowing ascn carebears in empire ?
can i join ?
|
Celesta Croft
Caldari Agony Unleashed
|
Posted - 2006.10.30 20:42:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Blacklight
The third suggestion I made regarding zero restrictions on the ships and modules allowed would simply allow an alliance to buy it's way to a win. I would not support that vision for the tournament despite the fact that a totally 'gloves off' and 'everything allowed' set of rules would more truly reflect on a whole alliance's PvP capabilities in game terms and their relative pecking order on Tranquility. The loss of the ability for a smaller, less well off or less recognised alliance to knock one of the big boys off their pedestal is definitely not worth the realistic reflection of life on TQ though, in my opinion.
Not to nitpick but the only way option 3 would be "gloves off" is if podding was allowed. I suppose the same could be said about podding in suggestion 1.
Truthfully, id much rather see fights where theres the possiblity of a warp out (to an extent, 1AU distance, 1 other spot to warp to). Failure to land inside the area results in a ring out+instapop. I would definitely enjoy some qualty interdictoring/mobile warp disruptor action. Use picture in picture for all I care so we can watch both locations. At least then the frigates would have something extra to do.
|
|
FraXy
Caldari E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2006.11.01 00:45:00 -
[61]
When will the final rules be set. Would be great to know what ships a team can take into a match ASAP.
This is my lazy attempt to make an uber-signature, please go away!
|
|
LeMonde
|
Posted - 2006.11.01 01:32:00 -
[62]
Final Rules.
|
|
FraXy
Caldari E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2006.11.01 01:46:00 -
[63]
Originally by: LeMonde Final Rules.
Awesome, did u see my post asking, DID YA???
Ok, i`m excited, does it show?
This is my lazy attempt to make an uber-signature, please go away!
|
FraXy
Caldari E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2006.11.01 01:58:00 -
[64]
Edited by: FraXy on 01/11/2006 01:57:58 Question, will Sisi be made stable so alliances can get a chance to practice Tactics/Ships without risking them on TQ?
This is my lazy attempt to make an uber-signature, please go away!
|
Kyguard
Fire Mandrill Astrophobics
|
Posted - 2006.11.01 03:16:00 -
[65]
Guess we won't be seeing any major amarr teams this time around..
=== It's great being Amarr, aint it?(tm) [Insert badass sig to match ego here] |
EElak
Amarr The Corporation The Corporation Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.01 10:20:00 -
[66]
Originally by: LeMonde
Tier 1 Battle cruiser 7p Tech 1 Tier 1 Battle cruiser 6p
Im confused
|
|
LeMonde
|
Posted - 2006.11.01 22:07:00 -
[67]
That line should definitely not be in there... sigh
|
|
Morning Maniac
Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2006.11.02 07:08:00 -
[68]
Hmmm, server is back up, now where to sign up?
MM http://eve.xonectic.com/forum/(out of game) EVE University commercial |
bungle2k 2
Caldari Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2006.11.02 09:11:00 -
[69]
Originally by: EElak
Originally by: LeMonde
Tier 1 Battle cruiser 7p Tech 1 Tier 1 Battle cruiser 6p
Im confused
Originally by: LeMonde That line should definitely not be in there... sigh
i'm guessing that T1 Tier 1 BC is 6 Points then
|
Alex Tremayne
Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.11.02 11:13:00 -
[70]
Allowing pirate/faction implants is a mistake.
It doesn't show the skill of the players in any way, it just raises the price of entering the competition by several billion Isk per team.
I'm really rather disappointed.
Lyrus Associates' Diplomat Of Last Resort |
|
Liet Traep
Minmatar Black Lance Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2006.11.02 11:24:00 -
[71]
Originally by: EElak
Originally by: LeMonde
Tier 1 Battle cruiser 7p Tech 1 Tier 1 Battle cruiser 6p
Im confused
Yeah that is confusing. Which one is it Le Monde?
|
|
LeMonde
|
Posted - 2006.11.02 13:10:00 -
[72]
The cost for tier 1 battlecruisers is 7 points.
The guy working on the sign-up website is sick today, as soon as he comes back we will begin the sign-ups
|
|
Valrandir
Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2006.11.02 21:42:00 -
[73]
LeMonde is there any limitation on the number of Webifier per ship?
Also note that in the beginning of the pdf document, "sixteen four" should read "sixty four".
See you in space, in december [;)]
-------------------------------- This has surpassed the Yarrdware specification and has been dubbed Uberware.
|
Bane Lord
VentureCorp Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2006.11.03 05:12:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Teh Rulz 6. Target jamming modules and drones are not allowed. Sensor dampening and tracking disrupting modules/drones are.
Does that include ECM bursts?
OMG! It's teh Bane! |
|
LeMonde
|
Posted - 2006.11.03 11:13:00 -
[75]
Valrandir: There are no limitations, and the document is correct. There are sixteen four-team brackets
ECM bursts fall under the category of target jammers, so they are not allowed either.
|
|
Rod Blaine
Evolution Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.11.03 11:18:00 -
[76]
No logistics drones, interesting.
Well, this is going to be one messed up bunch of fights.
Old blog |
Valrandir
Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2006.11.03 15:48:00 -
[77]
LeMonde, I bow to your written sixteen four number. Rod, yes no doubt :)
-------------------------------- This has surpassed the Yarrdware specification and has been dubbed Uberware.
|
Hoshino Hitomi
|
Posted - 2006.11.04 17:54:00 -
[78]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears as though the use of faction frigates and cruisers has still not been addresssed.
|
|
LeMonde
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 01:06:00 -
[79]
Those fall into the same category as T1 cruisers/frigates.
|
|
Body Count
Minmatar Necrosys Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.11.05 11:34:00 -
[80]
Edited by: Body Count on 05/11/2006 11:34:16 One thing, does a team have to have 5 pilots? could they just use 3 or 4?
|
|
Roxanna Kell
BURN EDEN
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 12:48:00 -
[81]
People that use Amarr should get an extra 5 points don't you think.
Quote: "Don't touch the RED butt |
Oceana
Black Lance Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2006.11.06 16:23:00 -
[82]
Clarification please.
1. "only 5 pilots are allowed to compete in each match" This does mean that you can choose to have only 3 or 4 on a team? you are not forced to field 5 pilots for each match?
2. there are no numerical limits on any modules any more, only restrictions on module types?
Thanks.
|
|
LeMonde
|
Posted - 2006.11.07 01:11:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Oceana Clarification please.
1. "only 5 pilots are allowed to compete in each match" This does mean that you can choose to have only 3 or 4 on a team? you are not forced to field 5 pilots for each match?
2. there are no numerical limits on any modules any more, only restrictions on module types?
Thanks.
1. You can pick between one and five pilots to compete.
2. Correct.
|
|
Anatolli Korenchken
AUS Corporation CORE.
|
Posted - 2006.11.08 06:37:00 -
[84]
I'm guessing that Faction ammo is still disallowed? --------------- Computer: HULL BREACH. Core implosion imminent. Controller: "SH*T! Prime the escape pod now! Commander! Commander what are your orders!" Commander: "Deploy the Gummy Bears."
|
Danden
|
Posted - 2006.11.09 11:59:00 -
[85]
Edited by: Danden on 09/11/2006 11:59:26 As you can pick between 1 and 5 participants in a match I assume you don't have to spend all your points?
|
ookke
|
Posted - 2006.11.09 13:37:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Danden Edited by: Danden on 09/11/2006 11:59:26 As you can pick between 1 and 5 participants in a match I assume you don't have to spend all your points?
The rules state that unused points count towards the 'destroyed points' number
|
Kungfu smacktalker
|
Posted - 2006.11.10 04:27:00 -
[87]
If my team uses 2 tech 1 frigs and they die I will lose the match if the other team keeps all its ships and has 28 points at the end correct?
What if I only use 26 of my points and I face a team that used all 28 points and it ends in a stalemate? Would that be a tie?
|
Ath Amon
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 10:02:00 -
[88]
ehm allowing damps is not a bit risky?
eg
cnr with 6 damps drake with 6 damps huggin with 4-5 webbers cormorant with 3 damps
after 1 sec of combat the other team will be stuck in space with almost no chance to lock the opponents
|
FireFoxx80
Caldari E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 11:00:00 -
[89]
So with Kali1 hitting on Nov 28th; the test server is just going to be full of people testing setuyps, rather than testing bugs?
What I do the rest of the time - Vote for a Jita bypass! |
LaCoHa
Caldari Deep Space Navy Caldari Deep Space Industral
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 11:33:00 -
[90]
Im not good at searching eve forums -
I am wondering how the ships are transported to the arena. Do we have to fly there ourselves? Or are we magically transported?
Do i need to be at the same station as the ship I want to use, etc.
thanks.
|
|
QwaarJet
Gallente Rage of Angels Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 14:01:00 -
[91]
I get a blank when I click on the rules link.
"Hobbes, she stepped into the Perimeter Of Wisdom.Run!" |
zeitza ta
Gallente Solidline Enterprise
|
Posted - 2006.11.13 18:44:00 -
[92]
The 1 bilion isk , at what name we need to send. Even if you are the best you are going down, dont hope that you will survive for ever you dont have any chance when i'm there, be prepared when you see me |
Leandro Salazar
Aeon Industries Confederation of Independent Corporations
|
Posted - 2006.11.14 00:27:00 -
[93]
Faction Battleships .................................................11 Tier 3 Battleship .....................................................11 Tier 2 Battleship .....................................................10 Tier 1 Battleship ......................................................9 T2 Battle cruiser ......................................................8 Tier 2 Battle cruiser.................................................8 Tier 1 Battle cruiser.................................................7 T2 Cruiser ................................................................7 Tech 1 Tier 1 Battle cruiser ....................................6 T1 Cruiser ................................................................5 T2 Frigate ................................................................4 T2 Destroyer ............................................................3 T1 Destroyer ............................................................2 T1 Frigate ................................................................1
Now LeMonde says T1 BCs cost 7 points. But this strange thing called logic tells me they *should* cost 6 points, since otherwise we have a gap in the 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11 order. That, and it also doesn't seem right that HACs and Recons should not be more expensive than T1 BCs. But maybe thats just me... --------- ZOMG my sig was concordokkened! Link removed due to bad language on remote site. -wystler
|
Kanuo Ashkeron
Eve Defence Force Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.11.14 08:01:00 -
[94]
What do u think is a tech1 tier 1 bc? :))
So i think those t1 bc¦s are twice in the list.
|
Evengard
Solar Dragons Red Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.14 10:08:00 -
[95]
Am i the only one who have problems with 60km arena radius ?? By setting these ranges you graetly limiting possibility of using fast ships. As i taked part in last tounament, BOTH times my Sabre was destroyed because of leaving this "arena". I move fast ... and to avoid missiles and drones, i need to be all the time on high speed, but i don't know where i can go ! There is no noteble arena walls, so if my enemy is on edge, and i'm setting orbit of 15-20 km, i'm automaticly explode.
___________________ Recon and Intercept |
LaCoHa
Caldari Deep Space Navy Caldari Deep Space Industral
|
Posted - 2006.11.14 11:07:00 -
[96]
I hate to keep posting this question - but i really need it answered.
How does a pilot get to the arena? Do i have to be in a certain system? Do i have to have all my ships and fittings with me? etc.
thanks - I am sure it is just like the system they used for the last ones, so I am sure that one of you tourney hardened vets will know.
|
jamesw
Omniscient Order The Sani Sabik
|
Posted - 2006.11.14 12:07:00 -
[97]
Originally by: LaCoHa I hate to keep posting this question - but i really need it answered.
How does a pilot get to the arena? Do i have to be in a certain system? Do i have to have all my ships and fittings with me? etc.
thanks - I am sure it is just like the system they used for the last ones, so I am sure that one of you tourney hardened vets will know.
The tournament officials have in their posession some advanced Jove Teleporting technology. In an instant, it can whisk you and your fitted combat ship right out of your home station and straight into the tournament arena!
--
Latest Vid: Domination! |
EvilNate
Caldari Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.11.14 13:00:00 -
[98]
Quote:
Tech 1 Tier 1 Battle cruiser ....................................6 ... ... Tier 1 Battle cruiser............................................7
Someone mind explaining the difference to me please?
Nate
|
Max Teranous
Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2006.11.14 15:00:00 -
[99]
Edited by: Max Teranous on 14/11/2006 15:00:58 Reading comprehension FTL.
Nevermind !
Max
--------------------
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |