EVE Search - Corporation League

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE Alliance Tournament Discussion

Corporation League

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)

LeMonde	Posted - 2006.12.19 12:42:00 - [1] With the third alliance tournament finished and the fourth one scheduled for June, we have now started piecing together plans for the EVE Corporation League. There are several things we are looking to achieve with this, some of which are listed below: Create a tournament equivalent for corporations and smaller entities. Downsize to fit those entities. Lower ISK requirements to be successful. Give us a better chance to test and tweak the points system. More feedback on rule changes which may benefit the the league and alliance tournament. Now, apart from the obvious ones such as disallowing pirate implants and faction ships, what are your thoughts on how this league would be done "correctly"? The structure would be similar to the alliance tournament, only that each team would (probably) have more fights and fighting would commence over the course of 3-4 months instead of two weekends. Finals could be shown on EveTV. Most of what you read above are speculations. This is all still in the planning stages. If you want to get your opinion heard, this is the time.

The Enslaver Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.12.19 13:35:00 - [2] Disallow COSMOS items - that is the main thing that would be effective; perhaps even disallow T2. --------
jamesw Omniscient Order The Sani Sabik	Posted - 2006.12.19 13:59:00 - [3] Love the idea! Bring it on! -- Latest Vid: Domination!
Verizana Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.12.19 14:31:00 - [4] **** yeh!
Two step Amarr Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.12.19 14:58:00 - [5] Has there been any thought given to a "stock" tournament, where every team is given the same ships/fittings and tactics + skill would determine the winner?
Shin Ra BURN EDEN	Posted - 2006.12.19 15:47:00 - [6] Originally by: Two step Has there been any thought given to a "stock" tournament, where every team is given the same ships/fittings and tactics + skill would determine the winner? That usually ends up with everyone flying the same setup after a couple of rounds which is generally quite boring and luck usually determines the winner more than anything.
spiralJunkie Minmatar EveTV	Posted - 2006.12.19 16:10:00 - [7] Originally by: Shin Ra Originally by: Two step Has there been any thought given to a "stock" tournament, where every team is given the same ships/fittings and tactics + skill would determine the winner? That usually ends up with everyone flying the same setup after a couple of rounds which is generally quite boring and luck usually determines the winner more than anything. Fanfest Tournament - Ruptures, Vexors and Caracals _ <Xyliana> Bob tempts school kids into the back of vans with candy
Arto Nupponen Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.12.19 16:48:00 - [8] Some kind of limit to who can join in tournament maybe? Like you would have had to be in that corp for 3 months to be allowed in or something. Don't want people from bigger alliances making corps just to get in.
Tuomas Oravainen Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.12.19 16:52:00 - [9] Disallow all ECM, disallow NOS. Allow only t1 and t2 modules. No faction ships.
Shin Ra BURN EDEN	Posted - 2006.12.19 17:02:00 - [10] Originally by: Tuomas Oravainen Disallow all ECM, disallow NOS. Allow only t1 and t2 modules. No faction ships. Thats kinda stupid. Modules which are popular for some reason end up on the nerf list if past tournaments are anything to go by. ECM should be allowed in as it is a counter to nos, damps and for the most part turtle tanks. Since its nerf I think it would add a lot to the tournament if they allowed it. I don't think it would be a jam-fest either as jamming ships are very vulnerable to drones and fofs and if ur jamming cycle fails ur in for trouble. I just think the majoirty of teams would use ecm as a dps reduction (IE multispec on that extra midslot). I think podding should be allowed (so there is some risk to using pirate implants). Logistics drones, I am unsure of. I think if ECM is allowed, so should logistics drones. It may be possible to introducte some form of warping out and introducte the need for scramblers and dictors. I also think CCP should do some things to make it easier for teams competing: Give a list of all corporations who will be there such as Polaris and EVETV so standings can be set. ECM burst and warp scrambling is a bad idea - Lemonde should be there cloaked. Teams should have to warp in at the start.

Chronus26 Gallente Dark Blood Contracts	Posted - 2006.12.19 17:09:00 - [11] <3!! I know I'd be entering if this goes ahead. -----
DruzidelCastro Vale Heavy Industries SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.19 18:29:00 - [12] I know I'd do this :D
Darpz Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2006.12.19 20:06:00 - [13] if its over the course of several months, allow anyone to be in the match that has been in the corp from the start of the current season. Otherwise it would be to hard to put together a team that wouldn't have to forfiet af ew matches do to people not being around.
Crellion Art of War Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2006.12.19 21:13:00 - [14] Edited by: Crellion on 19/12/2006 21:18:00 Originally by: Tuomas Oravainen Disallow all ECM, disallow NOS. Allow only t1 and t2 modules. No faction ships. I approve of this post Also: Up the amount of players, remove restrictions of how many ships of each kind. Also: Remove the requirement of a particular team. Anyone with the corp tag can compete so long as they have not competed with another corp in the same tournament. Also: Give isk prizes to succesful teams on a game by game basis (like the Champions league) so that "pvp athlete" can perhaps become a viable profession Arguably my opinions represent to an extent the opinions of my alliance and in particular circumstances give rise to a valid "casus belli" claim.
Danton Marcellus Nebula Rasa Holdings	Posted - 2006.12.19 22:03:00 - [15] Release a draft of the rules before hand and let people poke holes in them to get rules that allow for creativity yet not gamebreaking actions, such as the possibility to eject right into a smartbomb to get the other team disqualified from the whole tournament whilst quite possibly losing the match at that point yourselves. Also I'd like to see a tournament set in a safe period and not in as it would seem with the last one a time of change in the code which affects certain teams part way into the thing in a less than satisfactory way. Ourselves Alone
Edheler Quintessential Continuum.	Posted - 2006.12.19 22:11:00 - [16] Ok, first you need to have a league for qualifications for a "tournament" at some later date. So, you have your 256 teams in 32 divisions of 8 teams each. It's gonna have to be big, lots of corps are going to want to participate. Every team in a division plays every other team in the division twice. (14 fights) Each team has one fight per week and thus CCP would have to manage 128 fights per week. (Or less than 20 per day.) Given the 14 weeks of qualifications and 3 weeks for the tournament you can do this 3 times a year and get one week off. :wink: The top two teams in each division advance to the tournament. The system for managing a 64 team tournament seems to work well so I wouldn't fix it. Teams who place in their division in the bottom half are not allowed to participate in the next qualification series. (But are allowed back after that.) This keeps things mixing so that everyone can get involved at some point. Any member of the corporation or smaller alliance is allowed to participate in a match so long as they have been in their corporation and alliance for one month. Change the point system slightly, 3 points for complete destruction, 2 points for point win and 1 point for draw. Make the qualifying divisions somewhat time-zone dependent so that it's easier to get people around to fight each other. This will make scheduling easier and mean fewer forfeits. This also allows for scheduling of fights during the week. Don't show all of the matches on EVE-TV, until the finals, just ones which are decided to be good enough for the weekend broadcast. Thus you don't have to worry as much about individual forfeits. It would also allow the commentators to interview the teams after the fact and get the teams themselves involved in describing their fights for added color. Edheler Quintessential CEO
DiNoer Karjala Inc.	Posted - 2006.12.20 02:57:00 - [17] Originally by: Shin Ra Originally by: Tuomas Oravainen Disallow all ECM, disallow NOS. Allow only t1 and t2 modules. No faction ships. Thats kinda stupid. Modules which are popular for some reason end up on the nerf list if past tournaments are anything to go by. ECM should be allowed in as it is a counter to nos, damps and for the most part turtle tanks. Since its nerf I think it would add a lot to the tournament if they allowed it. I don't think it would be a jam-fest either as jamming ships are very vulnerable to drones and fofs and if ur jamming cycle fails ur in for trouble. I just think the majoirty of teams would use ecm as a dps reduction (IE multispec on that extra midslot). I think podding should be allowed (so there is some risk to using pirate implants). Logistics drones, I am unsure of. I think if ECM is allowed, so should logistics drones. Agree. Look at increasing the gang size to 10ish? No Fraction/T2 ships! La prospTritT de l'Gme libre La prospTritT de la fTdTration
Drakkan Rhal	Posted - 2006.12.20 03:47:00 - [18] Well if you could do all you can to reduce lag on "eve's" end would be great. Perhaps holding the tournament in a "dead zone" where eve mail, incomming invitations , and all but the gang channel are blocked would help reduce some of the lag. A "salary cap" on ship mods, implants, and the like would also be great. Nothing too low of course, but set at a reasonable limit too allow every alliance a chance. this would reduce most of the issues with the larger alliances dominating through wealth( although i do understand that wealth is a part of the tournament), look at how much hockey has benifited :P...
Raem Civrie Umbra Congregatio Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.12.20 04:00:00 - [19] Edited by: Raem Civrie on 20/12/2006 04:01:22 I would love to see a tournament with point systems more geared towards cruisers and frigates. The point system does need to be tweaked (alot), but under the 3rd Tourney rules it'd be something around 13-17 points maybe, disallowing faction ships and COSMOS modules. I certainly wouldn't mind seeing the pirate implants banned in the Corporation tournament, but I guess that isn't something to hope for unless you people get more robust detection methods into the game. ---- Marginis and Tycho, sitting in a tree, camped in by fifteen hundred IAC
Danton Marcellus Nebula Rasa Holdings	Posted - 2006.12.20 05:32:00 - [20] Originally by: DiNoer Originally by: Shin Ra Originally by: Tuomas Oravainen Disallow all ECM, disallow NOS. Allow only t1 and t2 modules. No faction ships. Thats kinda stupid. Modules which are popular for some reason end up on the nerf list if past tournaments are anything to go by. ECM should be allowed in as it is a counter to nos, damps and for the most part turtle tanks. Since its nerf I think it would add a lot to the tournament if they allowed it. I don't think it would be a jam-fest either as jamming ships are very vulnerable to drones and fofs and if ur jamming cycle fails ur in for trouble. I just think the majoirty of teams would use ecm as a dps reduction (IE multispec on that extra midslot). I think podding should be allowed (so there is some risk to using pirate implants). Logistics drones, I am unsure of. I think if ECM is allowed, so should logistics drones. Agree. Look at increasing the gang size to 10ish? No Fraction/T2 ships! If some alliances had problems fielding a full team of 5, how do you figure corporations could field 10? Ourselves Alone

Hllaxiu Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2006.12.20 05:56:00 - [21] Edited by: Hllaxiu on 20/12/2006 05:56:26 Originally by: Danton Marcellus If some alliances had problems fielding a full team of 5, how do you figure corporations could field 10? Please don't insult alliances in this way - you had to choose your team of 5 months in advance. Since EVE, even in a tournament, is going to be a lower priority than anything in real life, it is fully understandable that someone may be suddenly unable to play the game at a certain moment. Each of those alliances could certainly field a team of 5 at any given moment, however choosing that team months in advance and not ever changing it is a problem. With this in mind: corporations compete. Anyone in said corporation can fight in any match. You could have two completely different teams between different matches, so long as those members are in the corp at that time. (this would of course require the team to check in an hour or two in advance) I think that would change the tournament more than anything else. One other thought: would an alliance be allowed to field as may teams as corps? If so, I look forward to seeing a RKK vs Evol final. --- Our greatest glory is not in never failing, but in rising up every time we fail. - Emerson
Danton Marcellus Nebula Rasa Holdings	Posted - 2006.12.20 06:06:00 - [22] Originally by: Hllaxiu Edited by: Hllaxiu on 20/12/2006 05:56:26 Originally by: Danton Marcellus If some alliances had problems fielding a full team of 5, how do you figure corporations could field 10? Please don't insult alliances in this way - you had to choose your team of 5 months in advance. Since EVE, even in a tournament, is going to be a lower priority than anything in real life, it is fully understandable that someone may be suddenly unable to play the game at a certain moment. Each of those alliances could certainly field a team of 5 at any given moment, however choosing that team months in advance and not ever changing it is a problem. With this in mind: corporations compete. Anyone in said corporation can fight in any match. You could have two completely different teams between different matches, so long as those members are in the corp at that time. (this would of course require the team to check in an hour or two in advance) I think that would change the tournament more than anything else. One other thought: would an alliance be allowed to field as may teams as corps? If so, I look forward to seeing a RKK vs Evol final. That's just presenting facts. You seem to have forgotten we were in the last tournament and didn't field full teams for all the matches ourselves. Ourselves Alone
TWD TAOSP Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.12.20 10:21:00 - [23] Allow people to be moved to the station with their ship + equip before a match, and then back to the original system afterwards. It will be a difficult for some people to move to the station with their ship + equip every time there is a match.
Mextor Slacker Industries	Posted - 2006.12.20 11:15:00 - [24] I have some rule changes that i think would be good 1. Take out all EW mod and drones, bar painters and webs(as they help both missile and gun ships), 2. Leave out repairing drones, 3. No faction anything mods or ships, 4. Don't limit the team a set number of players, anyone in the corp can take part as long as they have been in that corp 1 month or more from the start of the tournament, 5. Leave the points for AF's at 4 but make inty's 3 points 6. The overall points for the team, 2 more than last time but leave it that you can field a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 5 7. No restriction of ship types if you want to field 3 Recons or 3 HAC's or 3 CBC's you can as long as they fall with in the total point allowed. 8. Leave in faction implants in, but make Crystal implants effect shield HP not Boost amount like you were going to(and at the same time you can then make so they work with dreads like slaves do(this last one should get a response)) and before you flame what I have put, these are JUST ideas that would in my opinion make a corp and/or alliance tournament better. Full Stats
Rift Scorn Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.12.20 11:40:00 - [25] I think taking out pirate implants is a bad idea. Why penalize people for trying to field the best they can field? Matches such as Other World Enterprises were edge of your seat viewing because of Tank's full-set of Crystals. Ok, so not all alliances could afford them, but i guess that's much like the difference between those teams comparable to 'Real Madrid', 'Manchester United', etc, etc (if you get my analogy) and Farnborough FC. Not all over the idea of ECM though. Shin Ra made some good arguements for the use of jammers, but i feel would lean the entire league strongly to a Caldari Specc'd dominance. We'd just see Rooks and Scorps all over the place and watching a jam fest isn't fun viewing(although same could be leveled at NOS fests), although ECM took a hit on non-ECM ships with Revelations, with the right rigs and ECM strenghtening mods you can now get ECM stronger than ever on Caldari ships, and it would become a who could lock the fastest competition. NOS can at hte very least, be countered by NOS of your own; and some of the NOS heavy teams from the last tourney showed that you can still put an exciting match on. Why dis-allow Faction Ships as well? these are very much available to the 'smaller' teams as much as the larger alliances. The 4 x Navy Vexor's fielded by Tabula Rasa time was a fabulous match and one of my personal favourtites, and as RPer's (sorry if i got that wrong, i'm not 100% sure if you are, but i think i remember seeing somewhere) the option of Navy Issue Vexors and Navy Issue Megathrons are more than viable options, as rewards from agent missions and LP grinding. Again, why penalise people in a league style system for having the ability and the drive to field the best they can? Your friendly clone activation expert, free of service to the eve community since '03

LeMonde	Posted - 2006.12.20 12:43:00 - [26] Please remember that the alliance tournament will still be there for the big boys to clash. This is intended as a chance for smaller entities to show their worth and reducing the ISK factor which many people feel is what makes the alliance tournament unfair. The way I see it, allowing pirate implants and faction ships doesn't really make this all that much different from what the tournament is, and if we allow them the whole idea sort of becomes redundant. Personally I would like to see all T1 and T2 modules and ships allowed in this. Banning Cosmos modules is an obvious improvement if we're trying to cater to the smaller corps. Faction, deadspace and officer modules will of course not be allowed, just as they are in the alliance tournament. Issues like ECM, dampening, arena size and starting range, pilot numbers and selection arragements will be decided upon in January. A rules document will also be prepared and the rules discussed thoroughly. The current plan is to start sign-ups early February and fighting on the 1st of March. Keep posting your thoughts. Some very good comments so far and I'm hoping for more.

Mextor Slacker Industries	Posted - 2006.12.20 13:06:00 - [27] Edited by: Mextor on 20/12/2006 13:07:39 Originally by: Rift Scorn I think taking out pirate implants is a bad idea. agreed, about leaving then in, Originally by: Rift Scorn Why dis-allow Faction Ships as well? these are very much available to the 'smaller' teams as much as the larger alliances. The 4 x Navy Vexor's fielded by Tabula Rasa time was a fabulous match and one of my personal favourtites, and as RPer's (sorry if i got that wrong, i'm not 100% sure if you are, but i think i remember seeing somewhere) the option of Navy Issue Vexors and Navy Issue Megathrons are more than viable options, as rewards from agent missions and LP grinding. Again, why penalise people in a league style system for having the ability and the drive to field the best they can? it was only an idea, there are some benefits to have faction ships, but my idea was to try and take some of the isk out of the tournament as it is a corp tournament not alliance Full Stats
Shin Ra BURN EDEN	Posted - 2006.12.20 13:19:00 - [28] Originally by: LeMonde Please remember that the alliance tournament will still be there for the big boys to clash. This is intended as a chance for smaller entities to show their worth and reducing the ISK factor which many people feel is what makes the alliance tournament unfair. The way I see it, allowing pirate implants and faction ships doesn't really make this all that much different from what the tournament is, and if we allow them the whole idea sort of becomes redundant. Personally I would like to see all T1 and T2 modules and ships allowed in this. Banning Cosmos modules is an obvious improvement if we're trying to cater to the smaller corps. Faction, deadspace and officer modules will of course not be allowed, just as they are in the alliance tournament. Issues like ECM, dampening, arena size and starting range, pilot numbers and selection arragements will be decided upon in January. A rules document will also be prepared and the rules discussed thoroughly. The current plan is to start sign-ups early February and fighting on the 1st of March. Keep posting your thoughts. Some very good comments so far and I'm hoping for more. Another thing I didn't like about the last tournament is how some teams would just throw in two maulus or other frigs expecting them to die. I also think t2 frigs were too expensive points wise last time around.
Celero Incendium Sniggerdly	Posted - 2006.12.20 17:24:00 - [29] No corps that are in Alliances should be allowed I think. Either do a points system or a "spending cap", based on market value at the start of the league. Match times that are a bit more friendly to American workers would be nice as well. --ci
Levicus Sniggerdly	Posted - 2006.12.20 17:51:00 - [30] After watching the previous tournaments, I would propose a "Wallet" form of tournament. 1.) Each corp start the tournament with a 1B "Wallet" (entry fee) 2.) Corps must completely outfit their team (ships, mods, rigs) by buying them from a specific NPC station with controlled prices. 3.) After the battle, the losing team is removed and the winning team is awarded a cash prize based on the equipment of the opposing team (what they would have gotten if they had looted and sold the other team's mods). 4.) The winning team then advances to the next round, but must resupply any losses from their wallet. 5.) Raise the player limit to 10 members per team and allow anyone in the corp to fight, not just the same 10 every time. This would completely level the playing field in terms of resources and add a dimension of long-term strategy in terms of equipment use and burn rate. A corp that blew the whole wallet in the first few fights and suffered some heavy losses might find themselves in the latter rounds with only enough cash to field a frig fleet. Upping the player limit to 10 would open up world of new strategy (especially with regards to fleets with smaller ships) and allowing the corps to field any 10 players and not just the same 10 every time makes the whole thing much more accessible to the average player.



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.