Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
HONSOU FERRIX
Lockstock. Dead Terrorists
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 14:13:20 -
[1] - Quote
Anyone else think AT ships should not be allowed in the AT? |
Doomchinchilla
Collapsed Out Pandemic Legion
60
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 14:32:54 -
[2] - Quote
NaCl |
Neddy Fox
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
37
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 14:33:37 -
[3] - Quote
Haha.
hahahaaaa.
hah.
Jelly? |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
174
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 14:34:07 -
[4] - Quote
RIP |
Brian Levine
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 14:34:37 -
[5] - Quote
Anyone else thinks your opinion is irrelevant? No mad though |
Kat Ayclism
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
332
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 14:40:06 -
[6] - Quote
Anyone else think Dead Terrorists are terrible at the AT and could only copy a ****** comp from Camel/Hydra with poverty ships? |
Tyr Dolorem
Snuff Box Snuffed Out
166
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 15:07:39 -
[7] - Quote
Your masters can't hold your hand during the AT.
lmfao |
DHB WildCat
Genos Occidere Warlords of the Deep
499
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 15:09:29 -
[8] - Quote
I would love to see AT banned from tournies tbh |
Jenshae Chiroptera
2250
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 15:29:33 -
[9] - Quote
Followed a Reddit link. Good thing for you they don't have active accounts anymore.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids
There are other ways to fix Null Sec stagnation and Fozzie SOV is the wrong approach.
|
Kat Ayclism
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
333
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 15:31:51 -
[10] - Quote
DHB WildCat wrote:I would love to see AT banned from tournies tbh I'd love to see A and B teams banned from tournies tbh |
|
DHB WildCat
Genos Occidere Warlords of the Deep
499
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 15:35:33 -
[11] - Quote
Kat Ayclism wrote:DHB WildCat wrote:I would love to see AT banned from tournies tbh I'd love to see A and B teams banned from tournies tbh
i'ld love to see A, B, C, and D teams banned tbh |
Dancul1001
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
49
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 15:37:09 -
[12] - Quote
DHB WildCat wrote:Kat Ayclism wrote:DHB WildCat wrote:I would love to see AT banned from tournies tbh I'd love to see A and B teams banned from tournies tbh i'ld love to see A, B, C, and D teams banned tbh
what would hydra do then ? |
HONSOU FERRIX
Lockstock. Dead Terrorists
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 15:40:56 -
[13] - Quote
Brian Levine wrote:Anyone else thinks your opinion is irrelevant? No mad though +1. Would read again |
Kadesh Priestess
This Game Is Terrible Warlords of the Deep
480
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 15:43:10 -
[14] - Quote
Many above-middle level teams have enough funds to acquire AT ships, or already possess them. Only few of these are ballsy enough to use them vs another strong team, where you can actually lose your precious. |
BrainStraw
Mining Industry Exile Foundation Warlords of the Deep
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 15:43:16 -
[15] - Quote
Dancul1001 wrote:DHB WildCat wrote:Kat Ayclism wrote:DHB WildCat wrote:I would love to see AT banned from tournies tbh I'd love to see A and B teams banned from tournies tbh i'ld love to see A, B, C, and D teams banned tbh what would hydra do then ?
Who's HYDRA?
|
Kat Ayclism
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
333
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 15:47:26 -
[16] - Quote
BrainStraw wrote:Dancul1001 wrote:DHB WildCat wrote:Kat Ayclism wrote:DHB WildCat wrote:I would love to see AT banned from tournies tbh I'd love to see A and B teams banned from tournies tbh i'ld love to see A, B, C, and D teams banned tbh what would hydra do then ? Who's HYDRA? Are we having an existential crisis here? Search yourself, who truly is Hydra? |
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
108
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 15:48:45 -
[17] - Quote
BrainStraw wrote:Dancul1001 wrote:DHB WildCat wrote:Kat Ayclism wrote:DHB WildCat wrote:I would love to see AT banned from tournies tbh I'd love to see A and B teams banned from tournies tbh i'ld love to see A, B, C, and D teams banned tbh what would hydra do then ? Who's HYDRA? I have been pushing for Camenos, but can't seem to get any traction so far. |
Kat Ayclism
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
333
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 15:50:25 -
[18] - Quote
It's Hydramel, it will always be Hydramel. |
Forlorn Wongraven
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
158
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 16:00:03 -
[19] - Quote
Kat Ayclism wrote:It's Hydramel, it will always be Hydramel. Plz.
ATXI winner, 3rd place ATXII - follow me on twitter: @ForlornW
|
Yumi Kazama
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
16
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 16:09:44 -
[20] - Quote
yeah but ships should be able to do damage because it's a tournament so if they don't kill them then who really even will?
thanks. |
|
Tallardar
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
65
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 16:40:17 -
[21] - Quote
Dancul1001 wrote:DHB WildCat wrote:Kat Ayclism wrote:DHB WildCat wrote:I would love to see AT banned from tournies tbh I'd love to see A and B teams banned from tournies tbh i'ld love to see A, B, C, and D teams banned tbh what would hydra do then ?
Have to actually play the game more than once a year.
Pandemic Horde Tutorial Videos | Monthly Nullsec Recap
|
Free Minerals
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 16:44:21 -
[22] - Quote
Kat Ayclism wrote:It's Hydramel, it will always be Hydramel.
Pandemic Nihilist-Waffle Horde would be a pretty good alliance name tbh |
Destoya
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
436
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 17:14:33 -
[23] - Quote
I think you guys might have massively overrated the amount of cooperation that went on (hint: there was none whatsoever) |
Dancul1001
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
49
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 17:24:56 -
[24] - Quote
Destoya wrote:I think you guys might have massively overrated the amount of cooperation that went on (hint: there was none whatsoever)
anyone can look at ships fielded / bans used and see PL def has not alt teams Hydra on the hand has 3 ? :) |
Kat Ayclism
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
335
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 17:28:01 -
[25] - Quote
Free Minerals wrote:Kat Ayclism wrote:It's Hydramel, it will always be Hydramel. Pandemic Nihilist-Waffle Horde would be a pretty good alliance name tbh Independent teams have the misfortune of running their own comps, having to find their own practice members, and not getting at our sweet sweet stock of #fancy ships.
But you do gotta step that name-combining game up, mate. |
C' Luigi
Kumovi The G0dfathers
21
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 17:32:35 -
[26] - Quote
Risking of losing ~150b ship on a tourey, is one story. Other story is to have clean advantage of other team, supposing that other team cant field AT reward ship. So basicly if your making this thing even for all 64 team, AT ships should definitely be banned from tourney, or get their value higher.
Just to make one thing sure, we lost today to PL, they wiped us, not because of malices, but more because those BBs and officer Bhaal + they're piloting was perfect. So my post is not about PL is gay, but about having AT tourney which is standalone event, to be even for every single team.
|
Lugia3
The Africans
1498
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 17:38:37 -
[27] - Quote
Pandemic flavors.
"CCP Dolan is full of shit." - CCP Bettik
Remove Sov!
|
Forlorn Wongraven
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
158
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 18:00:26 -
[28] - Quote
C' Luigi wrote:Just to make one thing sure, we lost today to PL, they wiped us, not because of malices, but more because those BBs and officer Bhaal + they're piloting was perfect. Thanks for actually saying that from the opposing team! I did enjoy flying the blackbird, cause 7+ years ago I started pvping as jamming pilot in a Blackbird.
ATXI winner, 3rd place ATXII - follow me on twitter: @ForlornW
|
Buhhdust Princess
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
9143
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 18:22:03 -
[29] - Quote
Oh look DT whining about things again. |
Doomchinchilla
Collapsed Out Pandemic Legion
60
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 18:45:05 -
[30] - Quote
If DT had alliance tournament ships they could have won their match.
lol |
|
Rockstara
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
45
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 20:14:11 -
[31] - Quote
this thread could use some lime, then we could have some good margaritas. |
C' Luigi
Kumovi The G0dfathers
21
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 20:54:54 -
[32] - Quote
Forlorn Wongraven wrote:C' Luigi wrote:Just to make one thing sure, we lost today to PL, they wiped us, not because of malices, but more because those BBs and officer Bhaal + they're piloting was perfect. Thanks for actually saying that from the opposing team! I did enjoy flying the blackbird, cause 7+ years ago I started pvping as jamming pilot in a Blackbird. Nothin' else to add, good luck in competition. |
Allison A'vani
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
170
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 22:06:03 -
[33] - Quote
This thread is bad and you should feel bad for starting it. |
Travis Uchonela
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
35
|
Posted - 2015.08.23 22:44:15 -
[34] - Quote
The real issue is the experience gap. As long as deeply experienced groups like PL are dominating the AT pubbie alliances like OP's will never win. Please help us CCP. |
Bianca Bardot
Bianca Bardot Corporation
20
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 00:39:52 -
[35] - Quote
C' Luigi wrote:Risking of losing ~150b ship on a tourey, is one story. Other story is to have clean advantage of other team, supposing that other team cant field AT reward ship.
Ya, its totally impossible to get a malice ...
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=402655
oh wait. |
Shamis Orzoz
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
94
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 02:09:07 -
[36] - Quote
Risking lots of isk is one of the thimgs that makes the tourney great. Most pilots struggle with the prrssure of flying 50 billion isk ships. It keeps things exciting. Any serious team can afford what they need...but anybody with good skills should be abke to make top 5 without using anything terribly expensive. |
Tiberian Deci
Unholy Knights of Cthulhu Test Alliance Please Ignore
142
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 02:34:58 -
[37] - Quote
HONSOU FERRIX wrote:Anyone else think AT ships should not be allowed in the AT?
lol no
For real though Warlords of the Deeps fields Malices 3 times and no one cares, PL fields an Etana once and all of a sudden AT prize ships are OP. |
Aldjor Dayman
S.A.S Pandemic Legion
17
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 08:31:14 -
[38] - Quote
Tiberian Deci wrote:HONSOU FERRIX wrote:Anyone else think AT ships should not be allowed in the AT? lol no For real though Warlords of the Deeps fields Malices 3 times and no one cares, PL fields an Etana once and all of a sudden AT prize ships are OP.
^^ This.
|
Intonto
Duncan Tanners Honorary Corp
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 10:07:11 -
[39] - Quote
Oh look It is Pandemic Legion. The MacDonald's of Eve Online Bunch of deep fried food sellers |
DeadDuck
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
157
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 12:00:20 -
[40] - Quote
The AT ships should have a higher point value then their normal ship classes.
A Ettana having the same point base of a Basilisk, or a Malice having the same point values of a Retribution is laughable.
People all saw the power of these ships yesterday on the Match between Camel and Exodus. The match was won because of the Malice.
It's easy to say that Exodus lost because they made the wrong choices, but go after a 50K EHP frig with very high resistence profile and a sig radius of less then 30m is very risky.
The question is that the same 50K EHP frig has a cost of 4 points the same of their counter parts the classic AF's when in reallity the only thing in common these ships have is the name "Assault Frigate".
You start to see a patern where the teams facing the teams that have access to AT ships have to ban them in order they can have some kind of chance to win. It's the 1st time we are watching bans to Malice's, Etana's, etc..., but there are much more out there.
Yes PL lost a Etanna yesterday, but they won the match easily. After Shadow cartel killed the Etana there weren't much more they could do. Their major DPS ships were dead already. TBH they couldn't do much more then go after that super Logi. The same super logi that costs 13 points, the same has a basilisk...
Yes PL lost a 150B ship but they are on the verge of collecting 50 more BPC's of an AT ship. If you have to lose a 150b ship to win 50 x 150B, that's a good deal.
The years pass and the problem is becoming bigger and bigger: only a few teams have access to these ships, these are starting to be fielded sooner and sooner during the qualifiers (we saw them in day 1 this year).
I'm not in favour of banning the ships. Everyone likes to see them fielded. But CCP really has to do something about their point cost over the other ships of the same class.
A Etana is milles away from a Basilisk, a Cambion is Milles away froma Hawk and so on. CCP should agravate the point cost for these ships and make this move quickly or the AT will become a farse.
|
|
Dato Koppla
Kiwis In Space No Points Necessary
864
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 12:34:33 -
[41] - Quote
DeadDuck wrote:The AT ships should have a higher point value then their normal ship classes.
A Ettana having the same point base of a Basilisk, or a Malice having the same point values of a Retribution is laughable.
People all saw the power of these ships yesterday on the Match between Camel and Exodus. The match was won because of the Malice.
It's easy to say that Exodus lost because they made the wrong choices, but go after a 50K EHP frig with very high resistence profile and a sig radius of less then 30m is very risky.
The question is that the same 50K EHP frig has a cost of 4 points the same of their counter parts the classic AF's when in reallity the only thing in common these ships have is the name "Assault Frigate".
You start to see a patern where the teams facing the teams that have access to AT ships have to ban them in order they can have some kind of chance to win. It's the 1st time we are watching bans to Malice's, Etana's, etc..., but there are much more out there.
Yes PL lost a Etanna yesterday, but they won the match easily. After Shadow cartel killed the Etana there weren't much more they could do. Their major DPS ships were dead already. TBH they couldn't do much more then go after that super Logi. The same super logi that costs 13 points, the same has a basilisk...
Yes PL lost a 150B ship but they are on the verge of collecting 50 more BPC's of an AT ship. If you have to lose a 150b ship to win 50 x 150B, that's a good deal.
The years pass and the problem is becoming bigger and bigger: only a few teams have access to these ships, these are starting to be fielded sooner and sooner during the qualifiers (we saw them in day 1 this year).
I'm not in favour of banning the ships. Everyone likes to see them fielded. But CCP really has to do something about their point cost over the other ships of the same class.
A Etana is milles away from a Basilisk, a Cambion is Milles away froma Hawk and so on. CCP should agravate the point cost for these ships and make this move quickly or the AT will become a farse.
This, this and this! When I first saw Malices wrecking another team in some previous AT final, (can't remember which exactly) what dead duck said was exactly on my mind. Banning AT ships outright is stupid since the AT is one of the main places where they shine and get used most. However, they should definitely take up more points, bringing in a Malice which has the neuting power as a 4 med neut pilgrim and 50k ehp for the same points as any other assault frig seems a little ridiculous even if they are stupidly expensive.
There's also the snowballing effect where teams that win have more potential to field these ships in future ATs. Yeah it's possible to buy these ships but you'll never have the flexibility of the alliance that actually won them in the first place making it more and more imbalanced as the same teams keep winning.
Just my 2isk. I'm ready for the wall of flame from Hydra/PL . |
Miyamoto Uroki
TURN LEFT The Camel Empire
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 12:49:19 -
[42] - Quote
Dancul1001 wrote:Destoya wrote:I think you guys might have massively overrated the amount of cooperation that went on (hint: there was none whatsoever) anyone can look at ships fielded / bans used and see PL def has not alt teams Hydra on the hand has 3 ? :)
Out of curiosity, which one is the third team?
Also, I agree that AT ships should be adjusted point wise. They are way too cheap for their possibilities. |
Forlorn Wongraven
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
158
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 13:30:09 -
[43] - Quote
DeadDuck wrote:numbers that are way off reality Get good, kid.
ATXI winner, 3rd place ATXII - follow me on twitter: @ForlornW
|
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 13:44:34 -
[44] - Quote
Some people say "everyone can get a malice!" but at first there are 64 teams and only 50 malices possible therefore this is clearly false. More, say cut the teams down to 32, you can have two of the ship in a match leaving the possibility of only some teams having two while others only having one. In a tournament there should be the POSSIBILITY of each team having the same ships even it it costs a ton. With alliance tournament ships this cannot be the case no matter how you wrangle it.
More! If a ship is very very good, then it is in the interest of the people who won it not to give it out to teams who might use it against them *duh* they then can use it in future alliance tournaments greatly increasing their chances at winning 50 more shinny ships.
I'm not opposed to there being bling on the feild or the teams having to spend an insane ammount of money on ****. But they should have to spend it on 'infinite' items like officer mods. Anyone *could* get an officer mod and over an infinite period of time there would be an infinite ammount of them, but over the same period of time there can only ever be 50 malices.
Now it wouldn't matter if these ships were at all balanced, but consider the malice. You can hear commentators say the malice has equivalent nueting to a curse, a curse is worth 13 points but the malice is only 4 so by bringing a smaller ship you save 9 points and get the same benefit. By this logic the malice should be easier to kill then the curse, but it ain't. Infact it is way harder to kill than a curse, more over it fills the slot of a regular assault frig more than aptly and can put out good damage and tackle. So you also get a assault frig out of it, that is 17 points of ships you replaced with a 4 point ship, that can do the job BETTER than the other ships.
This makes no sense to say its fair to be in game, it would be if there was an infinite amount of the ships but still cost 90b because then everyone could have one.
The Unbalanced nature of these ships is clear to everyone who watched the Exodus vs Camel match, not only would Exodus have won but Camel would have been destroyed with any other 4 point ship in its place. The camel logi would go down the exodus logi would start repping their BSs and maybe 1 of the exodus BSs would have gone down for the 2 camel, the Exodus support wing would have stayed alive and cleaned up the Camel team. But because there was a SINGLE malice on their team they neuted out the logi and caused the match to go the way it did. Put in a curse in that match less points elsewhere and could be killed fairly easy, put in a curor its place and that ship would have been blown up, ETC with other ships.
I have watched every AT i could, i love the AT and consider it better than other esport type events, but that single match made me not want to watch the rest of this one and future ones, why? because i know in matches that will be a good fight a AT ship will be brought and instead we will have a mockery of an tournament.
Commentators went on about the 'clean execution' of camel. There was no clean execution on camels part. There was no O WOW THAT WAS AWESOME PILOTING! there was simply malice. I do not say this to imply that camel is not a great team, it is. I say this simply to say that they lost this match if they didn't bring a malice, bad piloting or out comped or whatever the reason. |
Shamis Orzoz
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
94
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 14:49:56 -
[45] - Quote
Late stage capitalism is a *****. |
Bob Shaftoes
TURN LEFT The Camel Empire
50
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 15:00:43 -
[46] - Quote
Mordirth wrote:Commentators went on about the 'clean execution' of camel. There was no clean execution on camels part. There was no O WOW THAT WAS AWESOME PILOTING! there was simply malice. I do not say this to imply that camel is not a great team, it is. I say this simply to say that they lost this match if they didn't bring a malice, bad piloting or out comped or whatever the reason.
What a pile of shite.
All the malice gave us in that matchup was flexibility. If we replaced it with a tech II ship, we would have adjusted our tactics accordingly and still would have won the match. |
Elsa Hayes
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
103
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 15:04:06 -
[47] - Quote
The alliance tournament has a long standing tradition of fielding prize and bling ships.
The name Tyrrax Thorrk should ring a bell.
|
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 15:12:57 -
[48] - Quote
Bob Shaftoes wrote:Mordirth wrote:Commentators went on about the 'clean execution' of camel. There was no clean execution on camels part. There was no O WOW THAT WAS AWESOME PILOTING! there was simply malice. I do not say this to imply that camel is not a great team, it is. I say this simply to say that they lost this match if they didn't bring a malice, bad piloting or out comped or whatever the reason. What a pile of shite. All the malice gave us in that matchup was flexibility. If we replaced it with a tech II ship, we would have adjusted our tactics accordingly and still would have won the match.
All the malice gave you was 17 points for 4 points, a curse worth of neuts at better tank on a logi. Don't kid around you got tons from it not just flexibility.
Again i don't think you are a bad team, i would have loved to see you field a team against exodus without an AT ship and beat them handily which i believe you could have. But with the AT ship in there what you might have done doesn't matter only that you used an unbalanced AT mechanic which is inherently unfair and promotes repeat winners rather than actual competition. If AT ships as they are right now are allowed it gives repeat winners a huge advantage. |
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 15:18:56 -
[49] - Quote
And of course people who have the advantage will fight to keep it (i would) but from a 3rd party perspective it is inherently unfair. BTW i bet on camel, not because i thought they would bring an AT ship but because i thought they were the better team. This was not shown in any way during the match and i should have lost my bet when exodus won.
I don't post on the forums, like ever. I don't like dealing with legions ;) of posters defending an indefensible position and by shear weight of numbers thinking they are correct. But i had to this time because i really do love the AT and think it would be a thousand times better without AT ships in them.
To the argument 'we gotta let them in because this is the only place they are used'. That isn't really a justification for letting them in the AT, the purpose of AT ships is to give an exclusive prize to the winner, that prize can be put in use many ways on TQ, for example by selling them to collectors for tons of money. Just because they aren't used by player choice on TQ doesn't mean that they can never be or should be given special status.
What i hope and pray to see is a repeat match vs exodus and you guys bringing a legit setup without an AT ship and just shutting them down i think it would be an awesome match to watch. If this matchup should happen you would have my bet again. I just wish it had happened this time. |
Kadesh Priestess
This Game Is Terrible Warlords of the Deep
484
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 16:25:58 -
[50] - Quote
DeadDuck wrote:A Ettana having the same point base of a Basilisk, or a Malice having the same point values of a Retribution is laughable. A merlin having same point cost as rifter, a typhoon fleet issue having same point cost of armageddon navy issue... |
|
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 16:49:53 -
[51] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:DeadDuck wrote:A Ettana having the same point base of a Basilisk, or a Malice having the same point values of a Retribution is laughable. A merlin having same point cost as rifter, a typhoon fleet issue having same point cost of armageddon navy issue...
Clearly we should make everything cost the same because there is a slight disparity between comparable hulls which results in them not being used everything should cost 1 point! Because its not the fact that merlin and rifters have the same tier bonuses and the same *basic* worth, its merely because they aren't optimal for the AT that there should be a cost difference. Your point is incorrect. Anyone willing to actually open their eyes and admit it sees that the malice has far more bonuses and has more worth to it than a retribution who's only job really is to tackle and tackle well. After all, isn't that the point of AT ships? To be OP compared to the same class of hull?
Infact when this years ships were first released there was complaining about them being to.... normal. And not really all that OP. |
Dancul1001
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
49
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 17:12:12 -
[52] - Quote
Miyamoto Uroki wrote:Dancul1001 wrote:Destoya wrote:I think you guys might have massively overrated the amount of cooperation that went on (hint: there was none whatsoever) anyone can look at ships fielded / bans used and see PL def has not alt teams Hydra on the hand has 3 ? :) Out of curiosity, which one is the third team? Also, I agree that AT ships should be adjusted point wise. They are way too cheap for their possibilities.
so you agree theirs at least a B team ? just not a C team? |
Kadesh Priestess
This Game Is Terrible Warlords of the Deep
484
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 17:18:34 -
[53] - Quote
Mordirth wrote:Your point is incorrect. Hold on, you didn't even get the point i was making. Comparing *anything* it to one of the ****-tier ships in current AT meta will show how ship you've picked is good, and it is getting you nowhere. Freki is much better than jaguar, utu is much better than ishkur, why aren't they used?
Maybe you're looking for answers to your questions in the wrong place? Or your answer is far from being complete? |
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 17:35:12 -
[54] - Quote
Kadesh Priestess wrote:Mordirth wrote:Your point is incorrect. Hold on, you didn't even get the point i was making. Comparing *anything* it to one of the ****-tier ships in current AT meta will show how ship you've picked is good, and it is getting you nowhere. Freki is much better than jaguar, utu is much better than ishkur, why aren't they used? Maybe you're looking for answers to your questions in the wrong place? Or your answer is far from being complete?
Maybe i don't understand your point but im trying to here. Is your point that comparing any ships to a ship not regularly used in the meta is pointless IE merlin vs rifter? Because of the fact that the rifter is useless and therefor even if it had 1 point would not be used?
If this is the case then my point still stands. If you compare a merlin and rifter they have the same basic worth even if the meta for the rifter isn't good. BUT a Malice and a Retribution do not have the same base worth therefore should not have the same base point cost.
for example freki and utu are much better than those other ships that you compared them too and should cost more than those ships, and this has nothing to do with the current meta. If next year the meta is compatible with a Freki and not a Malice the point cost to the comparable hulls should still be higher for both. Just because something isn't used this meta round doesn't mean it is *worth* less points than one that is being used as long as they have the same base worth taking meta out of the equation.
If i still misunderstand your point please help me out i really do want to understand.
My overall point is that it is ridiculous to support AT ships in the AT as it stands now, an AT ship is not comparable to the ships it has been grouped with in point cost. Raising the point cost might solve the problem but would need to be tested to see how it works out. Im not a "BAN IT NIAO" type of guy, but rather make a change test it next AT and hopefully it will fix the problem. I just can't understand how people actually think it is balanced the way it is now (unless they are merely fooling themselves or lying on purpose to maintain an advantage) |
Miyamoto Uroki
TURN LEFT The Camel Empire
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 17:37:30 -
[55] - Quote
Dancul1001 wrote:Miyamoto Uroki wrote:Dancul1001 wrote:Destoya wrote:I think you guys might have massively overrated the amount of cooperation that went on (hint: there was none whatsoever) anyone can look at ships fielded / bans used and see PL def has not alt teams Hydra on the hand has 3 ? :) Out of curiosity, which one is the third team? Also, I agree that AT ships should be adjusted point wise. They are way too cheap for their possibilities. so you agree theirs at least a B team ? just not a C team?
Mate, are you like 17 or smth? That's not what I wrote, I just wanted your personal opinion on that so called third entity. Besides, apart from Brent there isn't a single player on the camel team that has a Hydra background, okay. We're practise partners and obviously separate entities in all other regards. Can we please get over this? |
Doomchinchilla
Collapsed Out Pandemic Legion
61
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 17:58:46 -
[56] - Quote
Miyamoto Uroki wrote:Dancul1001 wrote:Miyamoto Uroki wrote:Dancul1001 wrote:Destoya wrote:I think you guys might have massively overrated the amount of cooperation that went on (hint: there was none whatsoever) anyone can look at ships fielded / bans used and see PL def has not alt teams Hydra on the hand has 3 ? :) Out of curiosity, which one is the third team? Also, I agree that AT ships should be adjusted point wise. They are way too cheap for their possibilities. so you agree theirs at least a B team ? just not a C team? Mate, are you like 17 or smth? That's not what I wrote, I just wanted your personal opinion on that so called third entity. Besides, apart from Brent there isn't a single player on the camel team that has a Hydra background, okay. We're practise partners and obviously separate entities in all other regards. Can we please get over this? Just like you had separate bans, and separate comps. Right? |
Forlorn Wongraven
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
158
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 18:05:20 -
[57] - Quote
Doomchinchilla wrote:Miyamoto Uroki wrote:Dancul1001 wrote:Miyamoto Uroki wrote:Dancul1001 wrote:
anyone can look at ships fielded / bans used and see PL def has not alt teams Hydra on the hand has 3 ? :)
Out of curiosity, which one is the third team? Also, I agree that AT ships should be adjusted point wise. They are way too cheap for their possibilities. so you agree theirs at least a B team ? just not a C team? Mate, are you like 17 or smth? That's not what I wrote, I just wanted your personal opinion on that so called third entity. Besides, apart from Brent there isn't a single player on the camel team that has a Hydra background, okay. We're practise partners and obviously separate entities in all other regards. Can we please get over this? Just like you had separate bans, and separate comps. Right? CCP should increase the time between matches so that the A-team can give the B-team the ships between matches.
ATXI winner, 3rd place ATXII - follow me on twitter: @ForlornW
|
Serena Greyskull
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 18:14:08 -
[58] - Quote
Miyamoto Uroki wrote:Dancul1001 wrote:Miyamoto Uroki wrote:Dancul1001 wrote:Destoya wrote:I think you guys might have massively overrated the amount of cooperation that went on (hint: there was none whatsoever) anyone can look at ships fielded / bans used and see PL def has not alt teams Hydra on the hand has 3 ? :) Out of curiosity, which one is the third team? Also, I agree that AT ships should be adjusted point wise. They are way too cheap for their possibilities. so you agree theirs at least a B team ? just not a C team? Mate, are you like 17 or smth? That's not what I wrote, I just wanted your personal opinion on that so called third entity. Besides, apart from Brent there isn't a single player on the camel team that has a Hydra background, okay. We're practise partners and obviously separate entities in all other regards. Can we please get over this?
so you're telling me that all those exact same bans, all those exxact same setups both your teams ran in every match were just coincidence, and you two telling each other to run the same setup to not give anything away is nonsense? There was absolutely no communication between your teams on which setups to run, which bans to make? OK good, because in my book that would be classed as collusion, and epople who do it are shitbirds who spoil the tournament for everyone.
I mean, its not like you guys havent been banned for heavily bending the rules before. I guess you keep getting around it though by bending more rules when it suits you.
I mean really, look at yourselves, and consider if what you are doing is giving both of your teams an advantage so you both can get prize ships. If there is any doubt there at all, you should be very worried that youre breaking a collusion rule. If i was in hydra, I would be.
Put all of that aside, put the fact that we want to beat you aside, I want you out of the tournament. Every single person I have spoken to has said the same thing, HYDRA ruin the tournament for everyone else. The tournament would be a lot better without you. |
Ais Hellia
Genos Occidere Warlords of the Deep
53
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 18:18:34 -
[59] - Quote
Serena Greyskull wrote: so you're telling me that all those exact same bans.
Are you dyslexic IRL and can't read 2 rows of text on null-sec?
Bans Orthrus(2)Cerberus(2)Barghest(1)Typhoon Fleet Issue(1)Widow(1)Blackbird(1)
Bans Loki(2)Tengu(2)Widow(1)Oneiros(1)Guardian(1)Blackbird(1)
|
Serena Greyskull
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 18:49:15 -
[60] - Quote
Ais Hellia wrote:Serena Greyskull wrote: so you're telling me that all those exact same bans.
Are you dyslexic IRL and can't read 2 rows of text on null-sec? Bans Orthrus(2)Cerberus(2)Barghest(1)Typhoon Fleet Issue(1)Widow(1)Blackbird(1) Bans Loki(2)Tengu(2)Widow(1)Oneiros(1)Guardian(1)Blackbird(1)
lol.
thanks for not denying you running the exact same setup. |
|
C' Luigi
Kumovi The G0dfathers
21
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 18:49:26 -
[61] - Quote
And 95b isk, is just a child's play. My accent was on actuall value of the ship, either you are dumb to see the point, or just trolling, and i sincerely hope that its second one. |
Serena Greyskull
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 19:00:44 -
[62] - Quote
It's funny, this is the exact kind of weasel word bull that hydra were spouting when they got banned the last time. They know they dont have any moral highground, so they resort to trolling and name calling.
They know theyre trying to bend the rules, we know theyre trying to bend the rules, its just a question of whether ccp will come in and lay the smackdown. |
Jandice Ymladris
Aurora Arcology
1503
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 19:39:06 -
[63] - Quote
Hm With all this talk of AT ships being fielded. they do seem limited in which ships are being used. Only the Malice was fielded multiple times & the Etana once (if I checked good) No other AT prize ships right? So what' s the reason for this? If I missed out an AT prize ship being fielded let me know
13th Alliance Tournament second weekend results
Empress Jamyl Sarum I assassinated by Drifter taskforce!
|
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 19:56:04 -
[64] - Quote
Jandice Ymladris wrote:Hm With all this talk of AT ships being fielded. they do seem limited in which ships are being used. Only the Malice was fielded multiple times & the Etana once (if I checked good) No other AT prize ships right? So what' s the reason for this? If I missed out an AT prize ship being fielded let me know
two main reasons are the insane fits of the etana and theneuts and the tank of the malice. |
DHB WildCat
Genos Occidere Warlords of the Deep
502
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 20:08:33 -
[65] - Quote
As a member of warlords and owner of 12 unique shis. Including those you have seen thistourney already. I agree that for their point value they are overpowered and i would love to see them either banned all together or increased in point value.
Some of us that use them agree with you all. Dont lump us in with pl wanting to have the uber advantage. Yes we will use them. We want to win. However i would have some fun and waaayyyyyyy less stress if we didnt use them!!! |
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 20:55:29 -
[66] - Quote
DHB WildCat wrote:As a member of warlords and owner of 12 unique shis. Including those you have seen thistourney already. I agree that for their point value they are overpowered and i would love to see them either banned all together or increased in point value.
Some of us that use them agree with you all. Dont lump us in with pl wanting to have the uber advantage. Yes we will use them. We want to win. However i would have some fun and waaayyyyyyy less stress if we didnt use them!!!
Understandable if there are rules you use them, i don't begrudge you this. Much respect for realizing the problem and admitting it. |
Theon Severasse
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
132
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 20:57:17 -
[67] - Quote
Jandice Ymladris wrote:Hm With all this talk of AT ships being fielded. they do seem limited in which ships are being used. Only the Malice was fielded multiple times & the Etana once (if I checked good) No other AT prize ships right? So what's the reason for this? If I missed out an AT prize ship being fielded let me know
Some of it's down to meta, for example the Utu has been fielded (and lost) by PL in a previous tournament, but with drones being limited to T1 I highly doubt that we will see one fielded in this tournament. Some of it is down to the actual strength of an AT hull, for example the Mimir is pretty much unanimously known to be ****, and doesn't fill any role that can be outperformed by anything else. And then of course there is the fact that teams may not have access to other AT ships, or be willing to risk the ones that they do have. |
Jandice Ymladris
Aurora Arcology
1503
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 21:18:08 -
[68] - Quote
Hm, so it's actually not a case of AT ships being too powerful compared to others, but rather that a select few AT ships are just too strong compared to the point cost?
13th Alliance Tournament second weekend results
Empress Jamyl Sarum I assassinated by Drifter taskforce!
|
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 21:34:17 -
[69] - Quote
Jandice Ymladris wrote:Hm, so it's actually not a case of AT ships being too powerful compared to others, but rather that a select few AT ships are just too strong compared to the point cost?
No, almost every ship across the board is more powerful than their counter part. But rather that the meta doesn't allow for some ships and others aren't worth the risk of cost fielding them. For example the drone meta of last year is gone, drones are gimpish now so the utu probably won't be fielded. Yet neuts are still extremely powerful so malices will still be seen. |
Serena Greyskull
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 21:35:29 -
[70] - Quote
DHB WildCat wrote:As a member of warlords and owner of 12 unique shis. Including those you have seen thistourney already. I agree that for their point value they are overpowered and i would love to see them either banned all together or increased in point value.
Some of us that use them agree with you all. Dont lump us in with pl wanting to have the uber advantage. Yes we will use them. We want to win. However i would have some fun and waaayyyyyyy less stress if we didnt use them!!!
Lol, the hypocrisy of you guys calling us out for having an uber advantage while running 2 teams is astounding.
For the record, i did the math. The best unique assault frigates are worth 2x the point cost of t2 assault frigates. The worst are about 1.3.
The best cruisers are worth about 1.5x the point cost of other t2 cruisers, with the exception of the etana which is pricelss compared to the others (who own them again?)
In terms of making them a higher point cost for next year, this potentially might be an answer. But people won't use them if you make them too high.
If you think CCP hasn't thought about this before, youre mental. Why do you think they distributed the AT ships more fairly? The more teams that have them, the less advantage the big teams have. It just takes time.
The only really OP ship that no other team has proper access to is the adrestia, and thats virtually useless this year, so I think people are making a mountain out of a molehill.
What needs fixing is the goddamn collusion rules so we can have a fair tournament.
Remember, we didnt bring ANY unique ships against any of the lower tier teams. They had as much chance based on shiptypes as everyone else. |
|
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 21:43:05 -
[71] - Quote
Serena Greyskull wrote:DHB WildCat wrote:As a member of warlords and owner of 12 unique shis. Including those you have seen thistourney already. I agree that for their point value they are overpowered and i would love to see them either banned all together or increased in point value.
Some of us that use them agree with you all. Dont lump us in with pl wanting to have the uber advantage. Yes we will use them. We want to win. However i would have some fun and waaayyyyyyy less stress if we didnt use them!!! Lol, the hypocrisy of you guys calling us out for having an uber advantage while running 2 teams is astounding. For the record, i did the math. The best unique assault frigates are worth 2x the point cost of t2 assault frigates. The worst are about 1.3. The best cruisers are worth about 1.5x the point cost of other t2 cruisers, with the exception of the etana which is pricelss compared to the others (who own them again?) In terms of making them a higher point cost for next year, this potentially might be an answer. But people won't use them if you make them too high. If you think CCP hasn't thought about this before, youre mental. Why do you think they distributed the AT ships more fairly? The more teams that have them, the less advantage the big teams have. It just takes time. The only really OP ship that no other team has proper access to is the adrestia, and thats virtually useless this year, so I think people are making a mountain out of a molehill. What needs fixing is the goddamn collusion rules so we can have a fair tournament. Remember, we didnt bring ANY unique ships against any of the lower tier teams. They had as much chance based on shiptypes as everyone else.
You did the math? can we see it? id love to see exactly how you calculated this. Im being honest.
As to why they might be distributing the ships more, it could be to make people want to do the AT because while they can't get top place maybe they can still get something?
|
Hanns
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 22:22:18 -
[72] - Quote
Guys I just want to apologise for Mr Rive's bad posting ok, thanks |
Captain Thunk
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
148
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 22:35:24 -
[73] - Quote
Mordirth wrote: Also if you can *PROVE* that there is something against the rules going on or something underhanded which CCP disagrees with then yes something should be done, but if you cannot PROVE it then nothing should be done. Which btw i would also like to see your proof since you so obviously think something should be done.
Proof comes next weekend when the two teams meet, despite heavy use of extremely expensive AT ships throughout the lower stages of the tournament you're going to see neither team field them, despite the massive advantages they offer as discussed for 4 pages. If any are actually fielded they will miraculously survive as they kite to match end. Then both teams will pull them out again until they meet again in the final. Other than a confession, you're not likely to get better proof.
Maybe they'll call the ships as bans and sigh in exasperation at the 'epic' fight that could have been had. |
Serena Greyskull
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 23:04:23 -
[74] - Quote
Mordirth wrote:Serena Greyskull wrote:DHB WildCat wrote:As a member of warlords and owner of 12 unique shis. Including those you have seen thistourney already. I agree that for their point value they are overpowered and i would love to see them either banned all together or increased in point value.
Some of us that use them agree with you all. Dont lump us in with pl wanting to have the uber advantage. Yes we will use them. We want to win. However i would have some fun and waaayyyyyyy less stress if we didnt use them!!! Lol, the hypocrisy of you guys calling us out for having an uber advantage while running 2 teams is astounding. For the record, i did the math. The best unique assault frigates are worth 2x the point cost of t2 assault frigates. The worst are about 1.3. The best cruisers are worth about 1.5x the point cost of other t2 cruisers, with the exception of the etana which is pricelss compared to the others (who own them again?) In terms of making them a higher point cost for next year, this potentially might be an answer. But people won't use them if you make them too high. If you think CCP hasn't thought about this before, youre mental. Why do you think they distributed the AT ships more fairly? The more teams that have them, the less advantage the big teams have. It just takes time. The only really OP ship that no other team has proper access to is the adrestia, and thats virtually useless this year, so I think people are making a mountain out of a molehill. What needs fixing is the goddamn collusion rules so we can have a fair tournament. Remember, we didnt bring ANY unique ships against any of the lower tier teams. They had as much chance based on shiptypes as everyone else. You did the math? can we see it? id love to see exactly how you calculated this. Im being honest. As to why they might be distributing the ships more, it could be to make people want to do the AT because while they can't get top place maybe they can still get something? Also if you can *PROVE* that there is something against the rules going on or something underhanded which CCP disagrees with then yes something should be done, but if you cannot PROVE it then nothing should be done. Which btw i would also like to see your proof since you so obviously think something should be done.
The points cost I did on a piece of paper which ive lost. If you take the malice as an example though, you can see why a heavily tanked sentinel mixed with a heavily tanked tackle frigate is worth at least 1.5x the points.
As for the collusion stuff, nothing will get done about it until after the tournament anyway, and then we will have more proof of it too. It's too late for them to backtrack on it, because they're already both in the finals effectively at this point.
Wait till after the tournament. People are getting sick of this, I expect ccp to come out with a rules clarification for next year. |
Centra Spike
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
166
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 23:09:50 -
[75] - Quote
Let just use max skill characters and run the AT on Sisi so every team can fly the exact same thing.
Follow us @PLIRC!
|
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.24 23:39:46 -
[76] - Quote
In regards to collusion, i understand it is hard to prove but without an event showing collusion it would be like judging guilty before any crime happened (psychopass) and that can't really be done yet nor should it be done. But if it does happen a extreme penalty must be dealt such that it will never happen again. More rules should be put out regardless.
As to the malice for example, you said 1.5x the points for a malice, but i believe this is to low because you do get a curse worth of neuts and at a faster cycle with more tank. i think it would more around 2.5. for the amount of pure ownage it brings to the battlefield. But that is what makes this part subjective based on what you judge about it and no matter what you decide would probably need twinking in future iterations. |
Captain Thunk
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
148
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 00:36:58 -
[77] - Quote
Mordirth wrote:In regards to collusion, i understand it is hard to prove but without an event showing collusion it would be like judging guilty before any crime happened (psychopass) and that can't really be done yet nor should it be done. But if it does happen a extreme penalty must be dealt such that it will never happen again. More rules should be put out regardless.
I seem to recall them being banned from an AT for doing it before.
Personally, I'm not so fussed. I just don't think it's exciting to watch for the spectators, especially when they put so little effort into hiding it. |
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 02:46:43 -
[78] - Quote
Captain Thunk wrote:Mordirth wrote:In regards to collusion, i understand it is hard to prove but without an event showing collusion it would be like judging guilty before any crime happened (psychopass) and that can't really be done yet nor should it be done. But if it does happen a extreme penalty must be dealt such that it will never happen again. More rules should be put out regardless.
I seem to recall them being banned from an AT for doing it before. Personally, I'm not so fussed. I just don't think it's exciting to watch for the spectators, especially when they put so little effort into hiding it.
If they did it before and are continuing to do it then clearly the punishment wasn't harsh enough ;p |
Shamis Orzoz
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
94
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 13:46:06 -
[79] - Quote
The malice is really the only ship that is drastically overpowered for it's point value. |
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 16:17:01 -
[80] - Quote
Shamis Orzoz wrote:The malice is really the only ship that is drastically overpowered for it's point value.
etana. also the malice is basically the only ship being brought consistently and creating the problems every average viewer who knows anything about eve can see. so much anger about the malice on the twitch chat after camel v exodus. |
|
WarFireV
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
426
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 17:15:49 -
[81] - Quote
I mean almost every etana fielded in the AT has died. There have only been a few matches where the etana has made it out alive. |
Kat Ayclism
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
337
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 22:51:31 -
[82] - Quote
I'm sure Hydralords of the Camel, as non-colluding teams that haven't run the same setups under similar bans, will surely bring some AT ships to massacre each other with, rather than have some uneventful garbage comps where one team wins but they conveniently reveal nothing new. Everything is on the line, after all and they aren't simply A and B team. |
General Vachot
The Vendunari End of Life
14
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 11:32:38 -
[83] - Quote
My 2 cents no to banning tournament ships that would be sad and take some wow from the AT. However yes to adjustment on their points value. Maybe a blanket +x points versus their relevant hull type to make it simple.
Not sure what value x needs to be but maybe they can start with +1 or +2 |
Alt ofanalt Spai
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 18:19:58 -
[84] - Quote
Kat Ayclism wrote:I'm sure Hydralords of the Camel, as non-colluding teams that haven't run the same setups under similar bans, will surely bring some AT ships to massacre each other with, rather than have some uneventful garbage comps where one team wins but they conveniently reveal nothing new. Everything is on the line, after all and they aren't simply A and B team.
I honestly used to think PL was just blowing smoke. But after watching that fight I noticed something wierd. No DHB. He was the loudest voice on the forums here for Warlords about being fair. He also flew typhoons in both of their previous matches prior to this weekend. I'm sure I am grabbing at strings here but to me it seems that the only reason DHB wouldnt fly is because he knew they were gonna throw the match. Just seems really wierd. |
DHB WildCat
Genos Occidere Warlords of the Deep
504
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 18:29:48 -
[85] - Quote
Alt ofanalt Spai wrote:Kat Ayclism wrote:I'm sure Hydralords of the Camel, as non-colluding teams that haven't run the same setups under similar bans, will surely bring some AT ships to massacre each other with, rather than have some uneventful garbage comps where one team wins but they conveniently reveal nothing new. Everything is on the line, after all and they aren't simply A and B team. I honestly used to think PL was just blowing smoke. But after watching that fight I noticed something wierd. No DHB. He was the loudest voice on the forums here for Warlords about being fair. He also flew typhoons in both of their previous matches prior to this weekend. I'm sure I am grabbing at strings here but to me it seems that the only reason DHB wouldnt fly is because he knew they were gonna throw the match. Just seems really wierd.
ummmmmmmmm no |
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 20:44:58 -
[86] - Quote
No AT ships brought during the Camel v warlord matches, automatic AT ships against every else it seems. |
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 20:57:50 -
[87] - Quote
Apothne "For a team not being able to bring AT ships they did the best they could."
Sums up the case against AT ships. |
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 15:35:22 -
[88] - Quote
Cheesur "We know that Warlords can just put down a bunch of AT ships and get an easy 2-0"
Because AT ships aren't broken in the AT. So stupid how can they keep this up if this doesn't change there is no point watching or playing in the AT next year. Just give Warlords and Camel more ships why bother with this nonsense? |
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 15:55:48 -
[89] - Quote
Can't throw money against it and it will work 100% yes you are correct chessur. But the point is that it gives such a huge advantage to put in AT ships and that these ships are not possible for every team to have, literally not possible no matter what you say.
You admit in your discussion in the stream that it is about money not about skill or effort. And this is the problem, CPP said they don't want it to be about input of money but currently it is. |
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 15:57:24 -
[90] - Quote
Just get 10 players to farm up the money! Maybe they spend the time farming money to buy ships to play the game with and to get better at the game not to buy AT ships?
Edit: I would like to know how much money the teams that brought AT ships had to farm up to get them, not simply have them from winning previous games. Or trading AT ships to get the ships they desired, but actually specifically farm up money for the AT ships. |
|
Jinche
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 16:40:04 -
[91] - Quote
https://www.themittani.com/features/year-life-pandemic-legions-wallet
According to that article, PL spent 800B on the 10th alliance tournament. So, I guess about that |
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 16:57:20 -
[92] - Quote
Jinche wrote:https://www.themittani.com/features/year-life-pandemic-legions-wallet
According to that article, PL spent 800B on the 10th alliance tournament. So, I guess about that
Just because you use a ship or lose a ship that costs alot doesn't mean you payed the cost of the ship, if you won it you didn't. If you traded it you really didn't also. The active act of farming the money specifily to buy the ship is what i want to know. |
Alekto Descendant
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
70
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 17:04:38 -
[93] - Quote
Mordirth wrote:Jinche wrote:https://www.themittani.com/features/year-life-pandemic-legions-wallet
According to that article, PL spent 800B on the 10th alliance tournament. So, I guess about that Just because you use a ship or lose a ship that costs alot doesn't mean you payed the cost of the ship, if you won it you didn't. If you traded it you really didn't also. The active act of farming the money specifily to buy the ship is what i want to know.
that doesn't happen the way you think it does. The Teams that have AT ships make enough money from passive income as an alliance to be able to afford it, and just consider the tournament into their alliance budget, much like we do. We simply place our bets that if we spend 800B on the tourney, and have a good shot at winning, our alliance makes 2T, so its a no brainier for us to spend the money. Plus, if the ships we buy don't die, we can always sell them latter, the value of AT ships only goes up (13B Adrestias are no longer a thing). I guess some team somewhere maybe had players trying to rat up enough for Cambion, but in reality, I doubt it... The teams that feel they need an AT ship are already pretty wealthy. |
Mordirth
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 17:31:02 -
[94] - Quote
Alekto Descendant wrote:Mordirth wrote:Jinche wrote:https://www.themittani.com/features/year-life-pandemic-legions-wallet
According to that article, PL spent 800B on the 10th alliance tournament. So, I guess about that Just because you use a ship or lose a ship that costs alot doesn't mean you payed the cost of the ship, if you won it you didn't. If you traded it you really didn't also. The active act of farming the money specifily to buy the ship is what i want to know. that doesn't happen the way you think it does. The Teams that have AT ships make enough money from passive income as an alliance to be able to afford it, and just consider the tournament into their alliance budget, much like we do. We simply place our bets that if we spend 800B on the tourney, and have a good shot at winning, our alliance makes 2T, so its a no brainier for us to spend the money. Plus, if the ships we buy don't die, we can always sell them latter, the value of AT ships only goes up (13B Adrestias are no longer a thing). I guess some team somewhere maybe had players trying to rat up enough for Cambion, but in reality, I doubt it... The teams that feel they need an AT ship are already pretty wealthy.
I get what you saying but my post was in response to cheesur saying "Just go farm up the money!" not that i actually believe it happens that way. I fully understand how much money a big alliance makes and thats the problem with AT ships in the tourney. Its a money based competition as it is it is not a skill based. This is not saying you teams are not skilled you are, but if you bring an AT ship to the game it totally imbalances the game and at a certain point doesn't matter how skilled you are this is why apothne said "Did they best they could without AT ships".
The best games of this weekend were games with no AT ships, espcailly from a viewers stand point. That match of exodus v nulli? dood a nail biter. AT ships ruin this competition as they are and im tired of people espcially commentators whos teams benefit from it defending it. The reason they are on there right now comes down to "OOO blingy explooooosions" like some fool from the borderlands franchise, rather than "Hey lets makes this competition as balanced and fair and fun to watch as possible" |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |