Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 43 post(s) |
Kayosoni
Caldari Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.12.18 03:44:00 -
[301]
Edited by: Kayosoni on 18/12/2008 03:44:41
Originally by: Saba Quiestador I would like to see a team penalized for having multiple of the same ship type. Say a 20% penalty, CUMULATIVE, rounded up, for each additional ship of the same type.
So the first Ishtar a team uses is 11 points, no penalty. But if the team adds a second one, that second one costs 14 (13.2) points. If they added a third, it would be 16 (15.84), fourth one is 20 (19.008), etc.
This would make an all-Ishtar (or all-Claymore, or all-Rook, all-Drake, whatever) team impractical, and would enforce some level of diversity in the teams.
Then you don't have to worry about making Ishtars cost more than Zealots, or something like that. This does that automatically. Also, because the penalty compounds, the penalties are not *too* harsh if you stay within reason. Teams could still use 2 (or maybe even 3) of the same ship without completely killing themselves - they just can't do 9 of the same ship.
Now, this doesn't prevent someone from using sentries as a tactic - it just penalizes people from fielding a homogeneous (and boring) team of limited ship types. You could still mix Ishtars, Domis, and Navy Vexors in a sentry-centered fleet, and maybe throw in a Mega to pop enemy sentries along with deploying its own un-bonused sentry damage. But that fight be a heck of a lot more interesting than 9 Ishtars with identical fits.
This is a horrible way to fix a problem that doesn't exist. considering that for the most part almost all ship types only work well with other same ship types (mixing a fleet of armor/shield tankers doesn't work, etc.)
|
Willy Nerfalot
|
Posted - 2008.12.18 03:47:00 -
[302]
Originally by: Saba Quiestador I would like to see a team penalized for having multiple of the same ship type. Say a 20% penalty, CUMULATIVE, rounded up, for each additional ship of the same type.
So the first Ishtar a team uses is 11 points, no penalty. But if the team adds a second one, that second one costs 14 (13.2) points. If they added a third, it would be 16 (15.84), fourth one is 20 (19.008), etc.
Are you joking? Goonfleet couldnt add up the numbers when they were integers, they wouldnt have a chance if you start bringing in fractions and complicated maths
|
|
CCP Claw
|
Posted - 2008.12.18 13:41:00 -
[303]
Rules are updated with what should now be the final revision.
|
|
Mes Ren
No Trademark Notoriety Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.18 14:19:00 -
[304]
Originally by: CCP Claw Rules are updated with what should now be the final revision.
Very interesting. This will vastly change the dynamics of things. Don't get me wrong, I think they are good changes. ________________________
No Trademark -- Mes Ren, Mes Builder -- -- CEO --
|
Katana Seiko
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.12.18 15:40:00 -
[305]
Edited by: Katana Seiko on 18/12/2008 15:40:12 Maybe you should still add something... People with names without vowels should say before the match how their name is to be spoken. There were a few complaints last year...
Will the EVE TV episodes be on youtube this year? And where is that thingy with the roids? --- "Multiple exclamation marks are a sure sign for a diseased mind." -Terry Pratchett |
KTOZ
Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.12.18 17:26:00 -
[306]
Cruiser, Tech 2 (except logistics) = recons and hacs or i cant see assault ships option
Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Kreul Intentions ([email protected]) |
Saibin Gias
No Trademark Notoriety Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.18 17:31:00 -
[307]
The way I read it was:
Recon 14 HAC 14 HIC 14 Logistics 12
Everything else is the same.
|
Moridin
Interstellar eXodus
|
Posted - 2008.12.18 19:44:00 -
[308]
i dont like that with reduced recon point cost this could turn into a jamming fest
i also won 2008 but i did not get any sig |
Fal Dara
Gallente Obsidian Asylum
|
Posted - 2008.12.19 05:48:00 -
[309]
I'm a huge fan of thse tourneys... e'en tho i loathe pvp.. watching these is an EVENT.
and i think the change to eliminate spider tanks and logistics ships is a nice change. it will, most likely, force the participants to think out their individual ship fittings better, and shorten the matches. It was really boring to see several of the matches come down to a set of dominix spindertanking till the end, but compleatly uable to kill anyone... or have a logistics keep the 2 least effective killers on their team alive till rounds end.. even the commentators got bored.
SO, the action will be more exciting, AND the ships should be more 'fit for battle' in a more real-to-game sense (who uses them in gate camps, for instance, lol).
good change... and i look forward to watching each match 10 times this year too :D
|
QwaarJet
Gallente hirr Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.12.19 08:01:00 -
[310]
Originally by: CCP Claw Rules are updated with what should now be the final revision.
I thought you were looking at sentry drones and drones in general? What happened to those changes?
|
|
|
CCP Claw
|
Posted - 2008.12.19 12:12:00 -
[311]
Originally by: QwaarJet
Originally by: CCP Claw Rules are updated with what should now be the final revision.
I thought you were looking at sentry drones and drones in general? What happened to those changes?
We were, and would like to. In fact, there are many rules that could be improved or altered, but the changes would be drastic and quite far reaching and hence outside the scope of this tournament and timeframe.
For example, in this microcosm of PvP, it is pretty much dead wrong to price certain categories with a catch all value - eg, Recon Ship points values are thrown out by the Rook. For the most part at least, as there are always ingenious setups that will make the other ships in that category worth their points when played and utilised correctly. The problem is that the worth of a ship is dependant on the rules. If we were to run a tournament that was a race to see who could race 1000km first, Rooks would be useless and Huginns would suddenly be the best ship to spend that 14 points on :) Anyway, I digress. We can make the points as complex or as simple as we like (maybe we could price rooks higher, maybe we could individually price every ship...), and leave it to you guys to do the rest. To paraphrase a great man - you can't have good stuff without having bad stuff.
On the upside, that means if we do make some of the changes we've been discussing for any future tournaments, they'll be different again and shake things up again. That's half of the fun of tournaments, coming up with the setups, right?
|
|
Goberth Ludwig
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.12.19 13:51:00 -
[312]
Originally by: CCP Claw
Originally by: QwaarJet
Originally by: CCP Claw Rules are updated with what should now be the final revision.
I thought you were looking at sentry drones and drones in general? What happened to those changes?
We were, and would like to. In fact, there are many rules that could be improved or altered, but the changes would be drastic and quite far reaching and hence outside the scope of this tournament and timeframe.
For example, in this microcosm of PvP, it is pretty much dead wrong to price certain categories with a catch all value - eg, Recon Ship points values are thrown out by the Rook. For the most part at least, as there are always ingenious setups that will make the other ships in that category worth their points when played and utilised correctly. The problem is that the worth of a ship is dependant on the rules. If we were to run a tournament that was a race to see who could race 1000km first, Rooks would be useless and Huginns would suddenly be the best ship to spend that 14 points on :) Anyway, I digress. We can make the points as complex or as simple as we like (maybe we could price rooks higher, maybe we could individually price every ship...), and leave it to you guys to do the rest. To paraphrase a great man - you can't have good stuff without having bad stuff.
On the upside, that means if we do make some of the changes we've been discussing for any future tournaments, they'll be different again and shake things up again. That's half of the fun of tournaments, coming up with the setups, right?
translation: :effort:
- Gob
|
GabrIeI Night
|
Posted - 2008.12.19 14:43:00 -
[313]
Some of my friends made an app for the tourney earlier, they didnt add a reason for the 500mil wired.
Would this count as a void app anyone!?
Also is there any word on whether theres still places or not?
cheers guys
|
Andor Traxel
Nebula Rasa Holdings Nebula Rasa
|
Posted - 2008.12.19 17:45:00 -
[314]
Interesting Rules. I think the fights will be entertaining. At least until all the copycats see what a few elite battlespace technicians can do with 9 rigged myrmidons fitted with t2 heavy armor bots and sentries.
|
Tyrrax Thorrk
Amarr Guiding Hand Social Club Otherworld Empire Productions
|
Posted - 2008.12.19 17:56:00 -
[315]
Originally by: Andor Traxel Interesting Rules. I think the fights will be entertaining. At least until all the copycats see what a few elite battlespace technicians can do with 9 rigged myrmidons fitted with t2 heavy armor bots and sentries.
you can only field 7 with the current rules, plus myrmidons aren't that hot with only 3 sentry each ;d they used to be pretty godly tho
|
Saibin Gias
No Trademark Notoriety Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.19 18:49:00 -
[316]
9 Myrmidons = 100 pts?
You must be the goonfleet's resident mathmatician.
|
Mes Ren
No Trademark Notoriety Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.19 19:31:00 -
[317]
Originally by: Andor Traxel Interesting Rules. I think the fights will be entertaining. At least until all the copycats see what a few elite battlespace technicians can do with 9 rigged myrmidons fitted with t2 heavy armor bots and sentries.
I certainly hope we face this every single fight, though it would be disappointing to not get to shoot at it. ________________________
No Trademark -- Mes Ren, Mes Builder -- -- CEO --
|
elorran
Minmatar Department of Defence
|
Posted - 2008.12.20 10:40:00 -
[318]
Edited by: elorran on 20/12/2008 10:40:39 What, no shuttles? And I was so hoping to try to bump the opposing side out of the arena, darn - - Department of Defence's Peeping Tom |
Half Blindman
|
Posted - 2008.12.20 12:26:00 -
[319]
I agree that removing the shield and armour Logistics makes for a more spectator-friendly fight... However if thats your path of choice (as opposed to "if its in EVE its in the tourney") surely what you meant to do was ask players to design several different conflict scenarios for tournament and pick the best?
|
Kashimir
Otoko no Baito
|
Posted - 2008.12.20 23:20:00 -
[320]
Nice balance... 7x t2 cruisers + a filler-frigate is still a very viable yet not overpowered option. And even more than spidertanking I think the ECM-drones were the 'thing' of the last tourney. We might see some of 'em changed for logistic drones this time. Damn.. this will be fun, even tho' I won't unfortunately be part of it -_-;
|
|
Andor Traxel
Nebula Rasa Holdings Nebula Rasa
|
Posted - 2008.12.21 03:10:00 -
[321]
Originally by: Saibin Gias 9 Myrmidons = 100 pts?
You must be the goonfleet's resident mathmatician.
I do remember crunching a few numbers with a goonfleet; I think it turned out 150-1.
|
Norwood Franskly
Minmatar Fleet of the Damned Dark Trinity Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.21 11:08:00 -
[322]
Someone needs to field 4 Macharials and a Claymore that would be win.
|
Soryn Kael
Chaos From Order Manifest Destiny.
|
Posted - 2008.12.21 18:49:00 -
[323]
So.. Zero Chance of getting a point value on tech 1 industrial ships?
I'm really serious here..
Give us t1 industrials worth 1 point!
|
Rip Striker
|
Posted - 2008.12.23 15:57:00 -
[324]
Is it allowed to release drones from drone bay (have them orbiting) before match begins?
|
Mes Ren
No Trademark Notoriety Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.23 16:02:00 -
[325]
Originally by: Rip Striker Is it allowed to release drones from drone bay (have them orbiting) before match begins?
In the last several tournaments, it was not allowed to deploy drones before the fight began. ________________________
No Trademark -- Mes Ren, Mes Builder -- -- CEO --
|
Rip Striker
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 10:57:00 -
[326]
Edited by: Rip Striker on 24/12/2008 10:57:23 Can't find anything regarding deploying drones in rules. Also, is it allowed to power up active non-aggressive modules before match starts, like sensor boosters and eccm?
Hmm, the rules could be a bit more ...extensive?
EDIT: Spelling
|
Tyrrax Thorrk
Amarr Guiding Hand Social Club Otherworld Empire Productions
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 18:02:00 -
[327]
Yeah you can activate dmg control, eccm, sensor boosters etc beforehand, just can't deploy drones / lock stuff / move, until match starts
(going by previous tournaments)
|
Mes Ren
No Trademark Notoriety Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.24 18:30:00 -
[328]
Originally by: Rip Striker Edited by: Rip Striker on 24/12/2008 10:57:23 Can't find anything regarding deploying drones in rules. Also, is it allowed to power up active non-aggressive modules before match starts, like sensor boosters and eccm?
Hmm, the rules could be a bit more ...extensive?
EDIT: Spelling
Wasn't in the rules of the previous tournaments either. It was explained right before the match by our "GM Travel Agent" -- the GM that was responsible for moving your team to the arena site, and explaining/guilding you through how everything will go, telling you not to move, etc.
Per the last tournaments, you could activate modules all modules at any time. You could NOT move, drop drones, or target anything (including teammates) before the match started. Failure would result in various penalties. ________________________
No Trademark -- Mes Ren, Mes Builder -- -- CEO --
|
Rip Striker
|
Posted - 2008.12.25 11:16:00 -
[329]
Ok! Thanks for info
|
Goberth Ludwig
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.01.06 12:03:00 -
[330]
Btw perhaps this been answered before but are "named" implants allowed, such as zor hyperlink and akemon modified zet?
- Gob
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |