EVE Search - Alliance Tournament VI: Official Rules Thread

All Channels

EVE Alliance Tournament Discussion

Alliance Tournament VI: Official Rules Thread

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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)
Random Womble Minmatar Master Miners	Posted - 2008.12.01 21:22:00 - [181] Edited by: Random Womble on 01/12/2008 21:24:16 Edited by: Random Womble on 01/12/2008 21:22:43 Originally by: CCP Mindstar Ultimately, I really am not a fan of banning any module or tactic - and if it were a tournament that focused solely on challenging fights for its participants then yes, there is no real reason to have anything banned. The fact of the matter is quite simply that the tournament is not just about the people competing - but also about providing entertainment for the thousands of people watching the tournament online. We need a set of rules here that will be interesting and challenging at the same time. Logistics is what allows alot of the entertainment. Yes overly heavy logstics can also take away entertainment but it would be possible to that problem without removing the logistics. Discussing it with a corp mate the otherday he said what he thought created the most tention and was the most entertainment value was when its uncertain if a ship is just holding or slowly going down (ie its losing a few slivers of structure inbetween each rep cycle) and if it can survive long enough for its side to lower the dps. Yes lots of eplosions are pretty yes we dont want fights that last 5 hours untill everyone runs out of ammo but also if every fight last 2 minute and everything is dead its going to cause problems for both you and your presenters and the team organising the matches (imagine all the filler you will need) and its going to get boring in its own way. Even if matches last longer its likely they will be more boring than logistics ones just a case of everyone on one side being jammed and the other having next to no DPS. Also on another note i still maintain maruaders considerable advantage over T1 BSs means they should be at least equal to the points of faction ones. T1 vs Maruaders: Damage is equal Maruaders get 3 utility slots for cap transfers/smartbombs/ect Maruaders Active tank much better Buffer tanks some T1 have advantages but not all Maruaders get bonuses killing smaller of classes of ships Maruaders huge cargo allows them to store alot of spare cap boosters + 4 weapons use less ammo so less space taken by that T1 has a better sensor strength Maruaders have better cap (in terms of recharge and/or ammount) and amarr/gallente maruaders have to spend less cap firing just 4 guns The main important ones are Tank, Cargo (because it can play a very impotant role with boosters), Utility Slots, Sensor strength, Cap Even as that is its still only one downside to 4 upsides (major)
Sigras	Posted - 2008.12.01 23:25:00 - [182] Originally by: CCP Mindstar I actually agree with most of what you are saying here. It is true that people always aim for survivability, that gank setups are a bit uncommon in tournaments thus far. In the past couple of tourneys, this has indeed manifested itself as a dual logistics rep fest. We fully expect that there will be teams that create new and improved ways of keeping the whole team alive with this new set of rules. Ultimately, I really am not a fan of banning any module or tactic - and if it were a tournament that focused solely on challenging fights for its participants then yes, there is no real reason to have anything banned. The fact of the matter is quite simply that the tournament is not just about the people competing - but also about providing entertainment for the thousands of people watching the tournament online. We need a set of rules here that will be interesting and challenging at the same time. With that, we had a long discussion about points, tactics, what is / isn't allowed in the tournament and for what reason. This got us to what was initially posted, and the stuff discussed on this forum so far. It should be pointed out too, that we are by no means adding to lists of things that are to be banned for all time from tournaments. ECM, for instance, was not a part of the first 3 tournaments, but it is in now. Why? because there are more ships on the field, and even a totally ECM based team can run into issues with this. Without ECM, you could never have such amazing upsets as when SF smashed BoB with their 10 thorax setup in tournament 4. So for this tournament, with the larger number of battleships potentially on the field, we feel that remote reps will simply lead to too much spider tanking to be interesting to watch. Spider tanking will still be possible through the use of maintenance bots, but these are vulnerable in their own right, and very interesting to watch as teams with an initially strong tank get picked off over time. The inclusion of rigs (previously banned) will help to offset this a bit, as they will allow ships to boost their individual tanks / hp by a margin. I agree that too much spider tanking is a bad thing, but is avoiding this grounds for making everything sub cruiser class un-viable? Im all for the idea that only logistics ships can equip remote reps which would solve the battleship spider tanking problem, and making them cost 30 pts would really make teams think twice before fielding them. The new points system would also make logistics much less viable; i'd like to see a dual logistics setup tank 5 megathrons :D
Letifer Deus A Astroid Belt Lotto Syndicate	Posted - 2008.12.01 23:25:00 - [183] Or just limit teams to a single RR logi... If your team can't even kill one logistics, it probably deserves to lose. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Brought to you by the letter ARRR!"
Papa Boats Es and Whizz Hedonistic Imperative	Posted - 2008.12.01 23:54:00 - [184] Originally by: Papa Boats I have to ask again why are boosters not allowed? You have taken them off the black market although many people are still buying them off the black market in the billions. All of the major alliances in the game will freely admit they use boosters on fleet ops in capital ships and even nano gangs. They have become widely used which you wanted. Yet when it comes time to show them off as the combat upper that you want people to do you always say NO. Now once again in the intro to the alliance tourney you are once again saying these wonderful additions to combat, which the alliance tournament is supposed to somewhat resemble. I have heard your arguments that we could have 20 people take the drugs and chose the people without the side effects but that can be easily mitigated by using your super dev powers to remove the drugs effects when you scan us for illegal moduals. Here is a simple idea that can easily be implemented to allow combat boosters in the tourney. Pilots can bring boosters to the tourney but may only consume them when they make it to the arena. I don't know how hard that would be, but I think it is an easy solution People would suffer side effects and others would not. Since I was not clear enough. Could I get an honest reply from a Developer who is part of running this tourney on why boosters are not allowed? I asked this on page 2 and all you care to reply about is tactics and why removing remote repair moduals will make this a more entertaining tourney. I find it very insulting you just ignored me without even saying I don't use boosters so they are banned or the above mention excuse another developer used last tourney. I mean if you really care to have my 500mil I would like an answer since you guys kept our 1bil for killing the Eve TV camera ship. In tourney number 4.
Soulspatch	Posted - 2008.12.02 00:25:00 - [185] Will CCP be putting up HD video of the matches for people to down load???
Ni Nee	Posted - 2008.12.02 01:49:00 - [186] You left out industial ships. Powerful ECM/ECCM platform and can carry extra ammo or boosters. They should be allowed.
QwaarJet Gallente hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.02 04:31:00 - [187] Quote: Ultimately, I really am not a fan of banning any module or tactic - and if it were a tournament that focused solely on challenging fights for its participants then yes, there is no real reason to have anything banned. The fact of the matter is quite simply that the tournament is not just about the people competing - but also about providing entertainment for the thousands of people watching the tournament online. We need a set of rules here that will be interesting and challenging at the same time. The initial rounds are not televised, why not have different rules for them? that will allow the teams strong enough to make a solid defensive setup the chance to go through to the last stages, but also force them to ditch that setup and adapt to a more offensive style if they make it through. Also, I would have thought that limiting logistics to 1 per team would have been a fair compromise. From first hand experience, I can tell you it is much harder to make a strat with only 1 logistics in it. It means you have to come up with means for it to interact with other ships in the fleet to stay alive and to keep cap going, instead of the twin logi circle jerk. This would mean fights would be shorter than last tournament, but not a complete gank fest that only awards aggression. I'm giving you a view of a pilot who has been in the last 4 tournaments. I'm not sure how much views of such people are being taken into consideration, but I thought you should know anyway. I notice you didn't take us up on that offer of having a player council to help decide the rules... oh well, maybe next time.
Kabal Reinard Es and Whizz Hedonistic Imperative	Posted - 2008.12.02 04:50:00 - [188] Papa, drugs are bad. Don't you know that? Only elitists use drugs and the type that would use faction ammo or mods. Those things are pirate associated and something any reputable empire corporate event would not endorse. Think of the kids. What would they think? To find their favorite pilot an avid user of extreme performance enhancing combat boosters available from Hedonistic Imperative. My genetic religious zeal cringes at the thought. I thought alliance tourneys were bastions of purity and fair play, like all of eve's daily activities (sic) . A step away from the cold harsh reality that is space. Only real pilots in real-time use combat boosters. Those with no pause button. and no Paparazzi to blow up. [/url]
Sigras	Posted - 2008.12.02 05:27:00 - [189] well i believe they said they want to reduce the random chance that can win you the match . . . thats why boosters arent allowed . . . and i found one more thing having no logistics ruins . . . ECM no ewar boat is going to survive a second in this tourney. sorry about the block of text, my phone doesnt return correctly
Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2008.12.02 06:36:00 - [190] Can't believe no one has brought this up before: PRIZES? Prizes? P R I Z E S ? Give it to me. -- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
Kadoes Khan	Posted - 2008.12.02 08:08:00 - [191] Originally by: CCP Mindstar Either way - the point you make merely highlights what the remote repping ban in this tournaments rules is aiming to achieve - the fact that even frigates can indefinitely tank heavy damage output with the help of logistics. Yes it is a viable tactic, and yes these changes are there because we don't want this tactic used. It has been used to death in the last three tournaments and it is time for something new. Like it or not, we want to see what pans out when this option is not available. Really I don't mind trying things out and seeing how it goes but I still think you need to re-examine the point cost of logistics cruisers with your ban on remote reps in mind. Not only that but you may want to reconsider your cap on 10 ships as without logistics many frigates are not very useful unless they bring EWar or have logistics backing them up. -=^=- "Someday the world will recognize the genius in my insanity."
Bloody Rabbit Jita Miners	Posted - 2008.12.02 08:17:00 - [192] Originally by: Sigras well i believe they said they want to reduce the random chance that can win you the match . . . thats why boosters arent allowed . . . and i found one more thing having no logistics ruins . . . ECM no ewar boat is going to survive a second in this tourney. sorry about the block of text, my phone doesnt return correctly So a few scorpions won't be able to hold up? 3-4 scorpions with shield rep drones at max range? I agree I wouldn't use a falcon as it is paper but in 0.0 we use the scorpion as it has a little tank to it. I would love to see the black ops used, I know its not practical but please BOB or Goons or one of the big alliances, use a black ops.
Beirut Papa Skunk Works Technologies Incorporated Frater Adhuc Excessum	Posted - 2008.12.02 08:30:00 - [193] I'm actually excited about the fact that there will be no remote rep'n modules used in the tourny, 'cause that will make for new fleet setups and make for more gank and less tank setups. Cant wait to see what ppl bring to the field... Hope to see loads of carnage :)
Xathytoz Gallente Scoopex Zenith Affinity	Posted - 2008.12.02 08:55:00 - [194] What about Cloaks by the way? Will they be allowed this time around, i.e. will we be able to e.g. wapr in cloaked with Force Recons and BlackOps???

CCP Mindstar	Posted - 2008.12.02 11:08:00 - [195] Originally by: Papa Boats Since I was not clear enough. Could I get an honest reply from a Developer who is part of running this tourney on why boosters are not allowed? Boosters are not allowed, as their inclusion gives advantage to teams with a large pilot pool. This rule was in place for the 5th tournament as well. Essentially, if you have a large pool of pilots ready to fight, they can all take boosters, and the pilots with the least side effects get pulled in to fight. Check the post here by Pilk (from the 5th tournament rules discussion), it outlines the scenario pretty well. --


CCP Mindstar	Posted - 2008.12.02 11:50:00 - [196] Originally by: QwaarJet Also, I would have thought that limiting logistics to 1 per team would have been a fair compromise. From first hand experience, I can tell you it is much harder to make a strat with only 1 logistics in it. It means you have to come up with means for it to interact with other ships in the fleet to stay alive and to keep cap going, instead of the twin logi circle jerk. Logistics ships are not the problem here. It is larger numbers of ships capable of fitting large remote armor / shield reps than in previous tournaments. The main culprit here are battleships, not logistics ships. It is entirely feasible to make a seriously mean spider tank with 5 battleships and no logistics ships. Thus, limiting logistics ships to 1, and not limiting remote modules on BS would do nothing to achieve what we are looking to do. If logistics ships were the problem, they would have been addressed in a similar way to how you are suggesting, or via points. --

Doxs Roxs Free Collective Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2008.12.02 12:04:00 - [197] Originally by: CCP Mindstar Originally by: Papa Boats Since I was not clear enough. Could I get an honest reply from a Developer who is part of running this tourney on why boosters are not allowed? Boosters are not allowed, as their inclusion gives advantage to teams with a large pilot pool. This rule was in place for the 5th tournament as well. Essentially, if you have a large pool of pilots ready to fight, they can all take boosters, and the pilots with the least side effects get pulled in to fight. Check the post here by Pilk (from the 5th tournament rules discussion), it outlines the scenario pretty well. Now you are just being silly, your scenario is impossible if people are not allowed to consume the boosters until they are in the arena and ready to fight... After 9 months of being a "!" face, I now discover that Im butt ugly instead...

CCP Claw	Posted - 2008.12.02 12:47:00 - [198] Originally by: CCP Mindstar Originally by: QwaarJet Also, I would have thought that limiting logistics to 1 per team would have been a fair compromise. From first hand experience, I can tell you it is much harder to make a strat with only 1 logistics in it. It means you have to come up with means for it to interact with other ships in the fleet to stay alive and to keep cap going, instead of the twin logi circle jerk. If logistics ships were the problem, they would have been addressed in a similar way to how you are suggesting, or via points. I'd like to weigh in on this too, but firstly I'd like to point out that you're wasting your time complaining about remote reps being removed as they will not be added back in for these rules. We discussed this change at length, more than any other. Every time we came up with a way of making Logistics viable but not overpowered (which was difficult; you often end up with a binary situation of them either being 'auto include' or 'wouldnt include' with points based changes and so on), we were left with this situation of remote rep circle tanking battleships which is, quite simply, played out; we wanted to make a change for this tournament. Someone early in this thread hit the nail on the head - consider this not as a change because RR is necessarily overpowered, but because it was so common we thought we'd change it up for the sake of forcing different tourney tactics. We could limit them to one logistics ship per team, limit RR to logistics only, limit total logistics modules on a team and so on, but then we're getting too dictatative (I couldve sworn that's a word, spellchecker disagrees...answers on a postcard please) with setups and we still wouldn't solve our core issue of wanting to see different things. And yes, different tactics were possible and often fielded while RR was around, but not so much as RR itself was fielded; this change (and others) guarantees new setups. The tournament would get stale if everything was the same each time, even with the changes on TQ since last time. So embrace it and figure out something new to do, and maybe come up with the next broken setup; that's half of the challenge :) Originally by: Doxs Roxs Now you are just being silly, your scenario is impossible if people are not allowed to consume the boosters until they are in the arena and ready to fight... Its not silly at all. Plus the fact that if both teams are allowed to consume boosters, even if its only allowed within the arena, you throw in a large element of random chance to the outcome of a fight. We want the tournament to be as much as possible a test of your piloting skill and fitting knowledge, and as little as possible based on randomness. Boosters are extremely cool on TQ, but adding a 'roll of the dice' to every tournament game is not in the interests of 'may the best man win'.

Slab Drinklots	Posted - 2008.12.02 13:14:00 - [199] I also belong to the group of people that think Ishtars with 5x Bouncer II or other long range drones are going to be nasty, especially if coupled with some EWAR support from a couple Electronic Assault frigs... Add an Omnidirectional Tracking link to add 20% Drone optimal range and tracking. You now have 72km optimal +42km fallof on your Bouncer IIs... Two drone link augmentors in your highslots ensures you have 100km control range. Now add a MWD and possibly a nanofiber or two to them so you can keep yourself at about 50-100km range from the enemy, fill your remaining 3 medslots with sensor damps or tracking disruptors (depending on what you fight). Remaining lowslots and rigslots are used to make you more or less cap stable with everything running and to add some targeting range, your ship is expendable and has a paper tank, you will rely solely on EWAR, range and speed to survive. Remaining highslots use small rails or other small weapons to kill of hostile drones, prefferably with a little range so you can kill off drones before they reach you or those that are going after your gangmates. Each sensor damp with max skills and a targeting range script will lower a hostile ships targeting range by 42,5%. Each tracking disruptor will lower a hostile turret ships optimal range AND fallof by 50,25% with max skills. Pland would be for Ishtars to drop sentries and keep at range while trying to take out the enemies EWAR ships and at the same time dampening and tracking disrupting their hostile ships. If an Ishtar is jammed or sensor damped he will order his drones to assist a gangmate that has a lock, that way you should still get full DPS on a hostile target for as long as atleast one person in the gang has a target Keres and Kitsunes are fast lockers and can dish out extreme amounts of EWAR at the beginning of the fight, they are there to add early support and try to lock down the hostile EWAR or gankships depending on how you want to play it. Even if you only survive with half of your Ishtars efter the initial clash Id say you should have a fairly good chance at killing off the remaining enemy gang after that. Remember that each Ishtar can keep atleast one close or medium range ship tracking disrupted or damped, unless setup specifically to counter it, Id say they could keep up to two targets busy each. Im willing to bet we will see several setups like this, and it would not surprise me if they where successful.
Derwent Caldari Free Lapland The Kadeshi	Posted - 2008.12.02 13:16:00 - [200] Once again... No T÷talhelldeath?
Doxs Roxs Free Collective Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2008.12.02 13:47:00 - [201] Originally by: CCP Claw Originally by: CCP Mindstar Originally by: QwaarJet Also, I would have thought that limiting logistics to 1 per team would have been a fair compromise. From first hand experience, I can tell you it is much harder to make a strat with only 1 logistics in it. It means you have to come up with means for it to interact with other ships in the fleet to stay alive and to keep cap going, instead of the twin logi circle jerk. If logistics ships were the problem, they would have been addressed in a similar way to how you are suggesting, or via points. I'd like to weigh in on this too, but firstly I'd like to point out that you're wasting your time complaining about remote reps being removed as they will not be added back in for these rules. We discussed this change at length, more than any other. Every time we came up with a way of making Logistics viable but not overpowered (which was difficult; you often end up with a binary situation of them either being 'auto include' or 'wouldnt include' with points based changes and so on), we were left with this situation of remote rep circle tanking battleships which is, quite simply, played out; we wanted to make a change for this tournament. Someone early in this thread hit the nail on the head - consider this not as a change because RR is necessarily overpowered, but because it was so common we thought we'd change it up for the sake of forcing different tourney tactics. We could limit them to one logistics ship per team, limit RR to logistics only, limit total logistics modules on a team and so on, but then we're getting too dictatative (I couldve sworn that's a word, spellchecker disagrees...answers on a postcard please) with setups and we still wouldn't solve our core issue of wanting to see different things. And yes, different tactics were possible and often fielded while RR was around, but not so much as RR itself was fielded; this change (and others) guarantees new setups. The tournament would get stale if everything was the same each time, even with the changes on TQ since last time. So embrace it and figure out something new to do, and maybe come up with the next broken setup; that's half of the challenge :) Originally by: Doxs Roxs Now you are just being silly, your scenario is impossible if people are not allowed to consume the boosters until they are in the arena and ready to fight... Its not silly at all. Plus the fact that if both teams are allowed to consume boosters, even if its only allowed within the arena, you throw in a large element of random chance to the outcome of a fight. We want the tournament to be as much as possible a test of your piloting skill and fitting knowledge, and as little as possible based on randomness. Boosters are extremely cool on TQ, but adding a 'roll of the dice' to every tournament game is not in the interests of 'may the best man win'. Aha, now I understand After 9 months of being a "!" face, I now discover that Im butt ugly instead...
QwaarJet Gallente hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.02 13:49:00 - [202] Quote: I'd like to weigh in on this too, but firstly I'd like to point out that you're wasting your time complaining about remote reps being removed as they will not be added back in for these rules. I'm not naive enough to think you would add RR back. You obviously thought it through hard, and although it's the wrong call in my view, you're going to stick by your guns. However, it doesn't mean that I'm not going to voice my dislike over it. Regardless of the rules however, MM will adapt and fight tooth and nail like we always do (can't do worse than last time, right?).
Zikka Hematite Rose Bionic Dawn	Posted - 2008.12.02 13:55:00 - [203] Originally by: Derwent Once again... No T÷talhelldeath? Totalhelldeath was a good idea on paper but in practice it didn't work well. Essentially it penalised teams that fielded small ships or a swarm of ships (where its hard to keep them all alive) over teams that turtled up.
Sigras	Posted - 2008.12.02 14:04:00 - [204] Originally by: CCP Claw I'd like to weigh in on this too, but firstly I'd like to point out that you're wasting your time complaining about remote reps being removed as they will not be added back in for these rules. cries Originally by: CCP Claw dictatative (I couldve sworn that's a word, spellchecker disagrees...answers on a postcard please) i believe the word is dictatorial Originally by: CCP Claw And yes, different tactics were possible and often fielded while RR was around, but not so much as RR itself was fielded; this change (and others) guarantees new setups. I guess my problem isnt that logistics was "The Tactic" but that logistics made so many other ships more viable; it was an integral part of being able to use frigates/ewar ships which are so paper thin that they would never survive without them. Yes i know that the scorpion has a tank, but i believe that in removing logistics, you also removed stealth bombers, the arazu, the rapier, the falcon, the keres (well basically any frigate) yeah, i dont like losing logistics, but the loss of non scorpion e-war is what really hurts.
StoreSlem Minmatar 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.02 14:23:00 - [205] Originally by: CCP Claw Plus the fact that if both teams are allowed to consume boosters, even if its only allowed within the arena, you throw in a large element of random chance to the outcome of a fight. We want the tournament to be as much as possible a test of your piloting skill and fitting knowledge, and as little as possible based on randomness. Why didn't anyone think of this when you 'fixed' ecm :/
Dihania Gallente SniggWaffe	Posted - 2008.12.02 14:25:00 - [206] In color I hereby predict the winning field compositions: 5 Falcons, 2 BSs (Armageddon + Megathron), 3 Frigates (Rifters or Rocket Kestrels) 5 Falcons, 4 Ishtars This year we will see a lot of Falcons being used and I bet you they will use drones and target painters for those damn frigates (inties, afs especially) Anyway I am looking forward to it, as I have the past years. Join "join sniggwaffe" in game. Good Service!
Papa Boats Es and Whizz Hedonistic Imperative	Posted - 2008.12.02 15:11:00 - [207] Thank you CCP Mindstar for covering what I already covered in my OP on page 2. That is an excuse to keep boosters out. I even put in a simple solution to that in my OP. So thank you for the blanket deny deny deflect answer that every politician is so good at. CCP Claw thank you for your responce on why boosters are not allowed. It seems a little short and not really a full reason on why to totally throw them away but it is still better than CCP Mindstar. I do not think you will ever change my mind but it is a better answer. The whole randomness is what boosters are about though. You take you drugs to give you that extra edge to get through tough fights like the ones you are trying to get in this tourney.The "Roll of the Dice" is what you risk to have that better optimal range or smaller sig radious or better repping ability. Even if you just let in standards boosters since they have the least chance of a side effect. It would show off half the potential of boosters. Do not get mad that drug dealers want to show off the toys YOU put in the game. Show them off as something you made and made great.

CCP Claw	Posted - 2008.12.02 15:44:00 - [208] Originally by: Papa Boats Do not get mad that drug dealers want to show off the toys YOU put in the game. Show them off as something you made and made great. They are great. They're awesome in fact :) So is remote repping, so are T2 rigs, so are pirate implants and named drones and officer items and cosmos stuff. But this is a tournament, where we define a set of rules, designed to catalyze people into working with what they're given and then using what they're given with their piloting skills to come out on top as the winning team. It is different to the previous tournament in that you have different tools, and different to the one before that, and different to the fanfest tournament, and so on. We're not denying these things because we don't like them, we're denying them for different reasons. In the case of boosters specifically, we'll have to agree to disagree - you think randomness is good, I prefer pilot skill and setup skill to be the determinant factor.

Tyrrax Thorrk Amarr Retrofitted Neogenics Amalgamated	Posted - 2008.12.02 16:43:00 - [209] Originally by: Dihania In color I hereby predict the winning field compositions: 5 Falcons, 2 BSs (Armageddon + Megathron), 3 Frigates (Rifters or Rocket Kestrels) 5 Falcons, 4 Ishtars This year we will see a lot of Falcons being used and I bet you they will use drones and target painters for those damn frigates (inties, afs especially) Anyway I am looking forward to it, as I have the past years. wouldn't rooks be more useful since cloaks aren't allowed ? also your strats use way too many points
Papa Boats Es and Whizz Hedonistic Imperative	Posted - 2008.12.02 18:08:00 - [210] Originally by: CCP Claw But this is a tournament, where we define a set of rules, designed to catalyze people into working with what they're given and then using what they're given with their piloting skills to come out on top as the winning team. I have to play devils advocate on this yet again. I will always give that boosters have the randomness of side effects and they can really screw you over when you least need it. That is what keeps me on my toes when I use them. You are arguing that you want pilot skills and tactics to win the tourney as well as team work. You will have that with the groups that enter but I still do not get how boosters are not pilot skill related. If you are serious about winning you will get everything you can to give you the edge. If your team is willing to take the risk of using combat boosters in the final match and get screwed with bad side effects that hurts but that the risk you take. The real pilots who understand about side effects and usefulness will not use boosters if they only have biology trained. They will have nanite control and nerotoxin recovery trained as well. Lets face it if the only skill to use boosters was biology and we had no way to stave off side effects not many people would use boosters now. Since developers introduced boosters they also gave skills to lessen the chance of side effects and pilots use them to there advantages. So no I do not understand how the randomness of side effects and pilot skills are separate entities. You use boosters at your risk but you train up skills to lower the risk. Oh and before you say they are hard to find all of the skills are currently on market in Jita as well as the boosters themselves.

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

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.