Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Asakura Manji
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.30 15:52:00 -
[1] - Quote
Are ships that have 13 charges in their ASB from before the capacity nerf was implemented allowed? |
sevyn nine
Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2013.06.30 22:30:00 -
[2] - Quote
It would be ridiculous if they are allowed (it definitely goes against the spirit of a fair fight), but it would also be tough to check for this. |
Professor Clio
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
214
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 01:09:00 -
[3] - Quote
Of course they're allowed. Why shouldn't they? It's not any more unfair than allowing AT prize ships for that same point cost as normal ships, is it? |
Buhhdust Princess
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
6831
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 09:35:00 -
[4] - Quote
I agree with clio on this one, this should be allowed! |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
6610
|
Posted - 2013.07.01 15:39:00 -
[5] - Quote
After some discussion internally we have decided to allow the legacy overloaded ASBs to be used in the tournament legally.
It's simply another method where collectibles can be used for moderate gain in a tournament environment. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Faffywaffy
Fremen Sietch DarkSide.
84
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 05:22:00 -
[6] - Quote
In that case, WTS two sleipnirs with 13-charge XL-ASB each. |
Destoya
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
111
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 06:07:00 -
[7] - Quote
This is a terrible idea fozzie |
Nico Aristaeus
The Vendunari End of Life
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 12:27:00 -
[8] - Quote
I agree with Destoya. This is terrible. Not being able to tell wether it is legacy or not throws the balance even more than just having to deal with the extra tank. Also, we cannot test against it as we cannot pick up these legacy ASB boats on the test server, contrary to collectables. Please reconsider. There are two types of people: People that can extrapolate from incomplete data. |
Kadesh Priestess
Scalding Chill
289
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 12:33:00 -
[9] - Quote
Most of listed complaints apply to flagships too, i guess. |
Nico Aristaeus
The Vendunari End of Life
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 13:07:00 -
[10] - Quote
Well, there is only 1 flagship we have to take into account. I would not like an extra shitstorm in terms of unknown tank range on the field. There are two types of people: People that can extrapolate from incomplete data. |
|
|
CCP Veritas
C C P C C P Alliance
781
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 15:09:00 -
[11] - Quote
Some excellent points brought up in this thread that we hadn't fully considered, specifically that overloaded ASBs cannot be seen nor practiced against.
However, there are some technical barriers in the way of us enforcing a no-overfull-modules rule - the same kind of barriers that are the reason overfull modules are allowed to exist in the first place. If I manage to get through the work I need to clear off in order for us to have a tournament, I will dedicate some time to finding a way around those issues.
So, as things currently stand, they will be allowed. If I get my tournament work done ahead of schedule, that will likely change. In any case, their status will not change once the tournament has begun.
We understand that this uncertainty complicates preparation for teams who have overfull modules at their disposal. We will communicate the status of this as the situation progresses and will reach a solid conclusion as soon as we can. CCP Veritas - Senior Programmer - EVE Software |
|
Arch Stanton's Neighbour
Forceful Resource Acquisition Inc
62
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 16:12:00 -
[12] - Quote
I distinctly recall more than a couple forum posts on the WTB section looking for ships with overloaded ASBs soon after the nerf that were explicitly to be used on the AT. Also shortly after the nerf was announced people discussed stockpiling those ships for such purposes.
Therefore IMHO anyone lacking them didn't really pay attention or care, so cry moar, HTFU, etc. |
Logical Chaos
Justmore
13
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 16:16:00 -
[13] - Quote
Money has always won tournaments or why have I never seen a known poor alliance at the top?
Some Officer Bhaalgorns would like to have a word with you regarding small and "poor" alliances being able to afford them. But yes you can prepare for that (i.e. get ready to be stomped by officer neut/webbing bhaal). Easy fix for 13 ASB Ships:
Simply make a rule that 13 ASB Ships have to be announced just like Flagships. There you go. |
Nico Aristaeus
The Vendunari End of Life
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 16:52:00 -
[14] - Quote
Arch Stanton's Neighbour wrote:I distinctly recall more than a couple forum posts on the WTB section looking for ships with overloaded ASBs soon after the nerf that were explicitly to be used on the AT. Also shortly after the nerf was announced people discussed stockpiling those ships for such purposes.
Therefore IMHO anyone lacking them didn't really pay attention or care, so cry moar, HTFU, etc. Fair point but it turns the AT into a meta game. Furthermore there may well be teams that did not know at nerf time they would participate. Also, why so rude? There are two types of people: People that can extrapolate from incomplete data. |
Logical Chaos
Justmore
13
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 16:53:00 -
[15] - Quote
Nico Aristaeus wrote:Arch Stanton's Neighbour wrote:I distinctly recall more than a couple forum posts on the WTB section looking for ships with overloaded ASBs soon after the nerf that were explicitly to be used on the AT. Also shortly after the nerf was announced people discussed stockpiling those ships for such purposes.
Therefore IMHO anyone lacking them didn't really pay attention or care, so cry moar, HTFU, etc. Fair point but it turns the AT into a meta game. Furthermore there may well be teams that did not know at nerf time they would participate. Also, why so rude?
AT is probably the biggest Meta event in EVE? Its all about spying on enemy tactics, setups, players and the connected weaknesses all while hiding your own tactics and setups from everyone else. |
Nico Aristaeus
The Vendunari End of Life
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 19:16:00 -
[16] - Quote
Logical Chaos wrote:Nico Aristaeus wrote:Arch Stanton's Neighbour wrote:I distinctly recall more than a couple forum posts on the WTB section looking for ships with overloaded ASBs soon after the nerf that were explicitly to be used on the AT. Also shortly after the nerf was announced people discussed stockpiling those ships for such purposes.
Therefore IMHO anyone lacking them didn't really pay attention or care, so cry moar, HTFU, etc. Fair point but it turns the AT into a meta game. Furthermore there may well be teams that did not know at nerf time they would participate. Also, why so rude? AT is probably the biggest Meta event in EVE? Its all about spying on enemy tactics, setups, players and the connected weaknesses all while hiding your own tactics and setups from everyone else. Well sure, lets assume you are right. Then still it does not mean that a higher degree of meta gaming by adding crap into the mix is better. There are two types of people: People that can extrapolate from incomplete data. |
Logical Chaos
Justmore
13
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 19:22:00 -
[17] - Quote
Nico Aristaeus wrote:Logical Chaos wrote:Nico Aristaeus wrote:Arch Stanton's Neighbour wrote:I distinctly recall more than a couple forum posts on the WTB section looking for ships with overloaded ASBs soon after the nerf that were explicitly to be used on the AT. Also shortly after the nerf was announced people discussed stockpiling those ships for such purposes.
Therefore IMHO anyone lacking them didn't really pay attention or care, so cry moar, HTFU, etc. Fair point but it turns the AT into a meta game. Furthermore there may well be teams that did not know at nerf time they would participate. Also, why so rude? AT is probably the biggest Meta event in EVE? Its all about spying on enemy tactics, setups, players and the connected weaknesses all while hiding your own tactics and setups from everyone else. Well sure, lets assume you are right. Then still it does not mean that a higher degree of meta gaming by adding crap into the mix is better.
You do realize, that EVE is so fun and different from all those other MMOs because of all the Meta involved? Else it would just be another MMO.
Anyway. If those ships are not allowed please be consistent and forbid usage of any limited edition ships including AT rewards. Also ditch that flag ship rule with officer fittings.
The "can not be seen" advantage can easily be neglected by having people announce that they have 13 charge ASBs loaded at the beginning of the match. People do not get more time to recognize the flagship as well. |
Nico Aristaeus
The Vendunari End of Life
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 19:38:00 -
[18] - Quote
Logical Chaos wrote:Nico Aristaeus wrote:Logical Chaos wrote:Nico Aristaeus wrote:Arch Stanton's Neighbour wrote:I distinctly recall more than a couple forum posts on the WTB section looking for ships with overloaded ASBs soon after the nerf that were explicitly to be used on the AT. Also shortly after the nerf was announced people discussed stockpiling those ships for such purposes.
Therefore IMHO anyone lacking them didn't really pay attention or care, so cry moar, HTFU, etc. Fair point but it turns the AT into a meta game. Furthermore there may well be teams that did not know at nerf time they would participate. Also, why so rude? AT is probably the biggest Meta event in EVE? Its all about spying on enemy tactics, setups, players and the connected weaknesses all while hiding your own tactics and setups from everyone else. Well sure, lets assume you are right. Then still it does not mean that a higher degree of meta gaming by adding crap into the mix is better. You do realize, that EVE is so fun and different from all those other MMOs because of all the Meta involved? Else it would just be another MMO. Anyway. If those ships are not allowed please be consistent and forbid usage of any limited edition ships including AT rewards. Also ditch that flag ship rule with officer fittings. The "can not be seen" advantage can easily be neglected by having people announce that they have 13 charge ASBs loaded at the beginning of the match. People do not get more time to recognize the flagship as well. Well, your last suggestions would be in line with the affordable for everyone kind of mindset CCP went with for this tourney. However, you still have not refuted the not being able to train against it part and I am also not convinced by your meta reasoning. Surely this game is fun and meta gaming makes it more fun. This does not imply that a higher degree of meta gaming is going to improve the game mechanic. The ASB introduction was a muck up as it was much too strong. The way I see it we are going to feel the remnants of this muck up on one of CCP's poster events more than a year after. Assuming we are not going to find common ground lets just respectfully disagree. There are two types of people: People that can extrapolate from incomplete data. |
Logical Chaos
Justmore
13
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 19:51:00 -
[19] - Quote
Well the main thing that made ASB insanely strong were those dual ASB fits with Crystals, Drugs and T3 Bonuses.
This effectively allowed solo players to circumvent the crazy 60second reload time by having a) more boosts through crystals and drugs b) a second ASB for those 60 seconds
basically making the ship invulnerable as long as it had cap charges.
In the AT people will not have crystals and Drugs (they will likely also not field a Command T3 but a Command Ship which gives slightly lesser boosts).
Of course this does not leave the fact untouched that the 13charge ASB stays roughly twice as good as the old ASB. Compared to Tournament Reward Ships its quite a small thing imo. |
Nico Aristaeus
The Vendunari End of Life
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 20:04:00 -
[20] - Quote
Logical Chaos wrote:Well the main thing that made ASB insanely strong were those dual ASB fits with Crystals, Drugs and T3 Bonuses.
This effectively allowed solo players to circumvent the crazy 60second reload time by having a) more boosts through crystals and drugs b) a second ASB for those 60 seconds
basically making the ship invulnerable as long as it had cap charges.
In the AT people will not have crystals and Drugs (they will likely also not field a Command T3 but a Command Ship which gives slightly lesser boosts).
Of course this does not leave the fact untouched that the 13charge ASB stays roughly twice as good as the old ASB. Compared to Tournament Reward Ships its quite a small thing imo. Yeah I agree. I am just worried we will see a lot of one-sided matches involving shield fleets that might have been less one-sided without the 13ASB with a possibility that you might not be able to tell the difference between ships. I do not know if removing the 13ASB would radically change fleet compositions. Obviously AT price ships do radiacally change fleet compositions. There are two types of people: People that can extrapolate from incomplete data. |
|
Logical Chaos
Justmore
13
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 20:17:00 -
[21] - Quote
We will see a lot of one-sided matches.
But that is because those winning teams put in the necessary dedication for this.
I have been flying in AT9 once (Raiden vs Darkside) and I took part in Test Realm Trainings like twice before. And you obviously see the difference in dedication. ISK was not an issue there even.
And those teams that have the dedication also have the ISK to back their dedication up with the proper fittings. 13 or 8 charge ASBs won't change a lot there. |
Mawderator
The Pro Choice Exodus.
26
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 21:43:00 -
[22] - Quote
As a tournament captain who has access to a small stockpile of 13 charge ASB ships, I'd much rather not see them used in the tournament for the reasons that Destoya listed. |
Thecla Elarik
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
22
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 22:08:00 -
[23] - Quote
Agreeing with Destoya - if you can find any way of keeping 13-charge ASB's out, please do. |
Nico Aristaeus
The Vendunari End of Life
9
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 22:09:00 -
[24] - Quote
Logical Chaos wrote:We will see a lot of one-sided matches.
But that is because those winning teams put in the necessary dedication for this.
I have been flying in AT9 once (Raiden vs Darkside) and I took part in Test Realm Trainings like twice before. And you obviously see the difference in dedication. ISK was not an issue there even.
And those teams that have the dedication also have the ISK to back their dedication up with the proper fittings. 13 or 8 charge ASBs won't change a lot there. Well I respect your input but what you are saying is anecdotal at best and it is a crappy assumption. What you basically say is that teams with more isk will have more dedication and will be objectively better anyway. That is 3 variables in one argument that have to go your way to be right. Secondly, if this is true, why is there any need for over powered gear if you are going to pulpmash the enemy anyway? What sentiment are you trying to defend because I don't get it.
edit: dedication Gëá wealth There are two types of people: People that can extrapolate from incomplete data. |
Logical Chaos
Justmore
13
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 22:26:00 -
[25] - Quote
Nico Aristaeus wrote:Logical Chaos wrote:We will see a lot of one-sided matches.
But that is because those winning teams put in the necessary dedication for this.
I have been flying in AT9 once (Raiden vs Darkside) and I took part in Test Realm Trainings like twice before. And you obviously see the difference in dedication. ISK was not an issue there even.
And those teams that have the dedication also have the ISK to back their dedication up with the proper fittings. 13 or 8 charge ASBs won't change a lot there. Well I respect your input but what you are saying is anecdotal at best and it is a crappy assumption. What you basically say is that teams with more isk will have more dedication and will be objectively better anyway. That is 3 variables in one argument that have to go your way to be right. Secondly, if this is true, why is there any need for over powered gear if you are going to pulpmash the enemy anyway? What sentiment are you trying to defend because I don't get it. edit: dedication Gëá wealth
It was not meant to showcase anything and merely an example.
It is the other way round: Those teams with dedication are not limited by their available ISK. Your second part is basically denying the definition of dedication: If you are dedicated you will do everything to assure you are winning. This goes from tactics etc to assuring you bring the best possible ships for the job. You do not risk anything by flying the second best fit or ship for the job.
Recent tournament winners second this statement.
EDIT: Anyway, I think it's a pointless discussion now. Everybody probably has his opinion on this matter. CCP shall judge this, but if they really want to forbid this (an announced change, giving everybody the chance to prepare - and if you did not think about it back then, you probably do not deserve winning AT anyway), then they better remove flagships as well as fancy limited edition ships for this decision to be consistent. |
|
CCP Veritas
C C P C C P Alliance
781
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 23:28:00 -
[26] - Quote
Logical Chaos wrote:they better remove flagships as well as fancy limited edition ships for this decision to be consistent. I do not follow your logic, can you lay it out? CCP Veritas - Senior Programmer - EVE Software |
|
Destoya
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
115
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 01:26:00 -
[27] - Quote
I think what he's trying to say is that the rich teams already have an advantage in tier 3 faction ammo, unique tournament ships, and better flagship modules (hint: they dont mean anything if you dont use them effectively, see PL's ATX match), so overloaded ASB are fine.
Just by the way, I did some math with a Sleipnir being repped by a scimitar against a team with 4000 DPS to better illustrate the advantage of overloaded ASBs, which I find is a quite reasonable situation to find oneself in. EHP numbers are after all charges of ASB, and also without overheating the scimi's reps.
Balanced Sleip has 147.9k EHP and takes 76 seconds to die Overloaded Sleip has 186.1k EHP and takes 97 seconds to die
overheating the scimi makes the disparity slightly worse, increasing the "death gap" to almost 25 seconds. A team with lower applied DPS also sees the overheated sleipnir come farther ahead as it can rely less on the ASB charges. Remember in that ~20-25 seconds said sleipnir and the rest of the team is dealing massive amounts of damage, and the number keeps increasing as that 4000 DPS is whittled away.
By the way, I do not find the argument that people who didn't keep old ships in their hangars were not "dedicated" to winning the tournament compelling, especially since said ships were just a result of CCP's inability to implement balance changes retroactively in certain scenarios.
I would like to point out that this ruling actually favors my team, as we have the capability to actually attain them when the others on the way up the ladder may lack the memberbase, connections, financial means, or "dedication" to obtain overloaded ships. Still, I am trying to convince CCP to reverse this in whatever way possible as I feel it's quite detrimental to the quality of the tournament as a whole for the reasons I outlined here and on the first page. (Just so you know, I personally would have no real problem if they banned prize ships, tier 3 ammo, augmented drones, and deadspace/officer modules on flagships (faction is still reasonable I think))
|
Admiral Goberius
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
14
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 02:38:00 -
[28] - Quote
take it to the next level
hide a bunch of 18 charge sleipnirs scattered across eve and let the most dedicated find them
step it up CCP |
Faffywaffy
Fremen Sietch DarkSide.
85
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 05:21:00 -
[29] - Quote
CCP Veritas wrote:Logical Chaos wrote:they better remove flagships as well as fancy limited edition ships for this decision to be consistent. I do not follow your logic, can you lay it out?
Hopefully that's sarcasm, Veritas.
Both legacy ASB and AT prize ships are: 1. Significantly more powerful than other ships with the same number of points. 2. Relatively rare.
The difference is, of course that seeing a 13-charge ASB sleipnir explode is not as exciting as watching (say) a Mimir explode. I would argue, though, that this is irrelevant to making the tournament fair, which IMO is much more important. The other option to make it fair is to have these ships cost more (say 1 point). |
Logical Chaos
Justmore
13
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 07:24:00 -
[30] - Quote
CCP Veritas wrote:Logical Chaos wrote:they better remove flagships as well as fancy limited edition ships for this decision to be consistent. I do not follow your logic, can you lay it out?
Yeah it's hard to follow my logic, thats why I have this name!!!
Faffywaffy wrote: Hopefully that's sarcasm, Veritas.
Both legacy ASB and AT prize ships are: 1. Significantly more powerful than other ships with the same number of points. 2. Relatively rare.
The difference is, of course that seeing a 13-charge ASB sleipnir explode is not as exciting as watching (say) a Mimir explode. I would argue, though, that this is irrelevant to making the tournament fair, which IMO is much more important. The other option to make it fair is to have these ships cost more (say 1 point).
This pretty much.
All arguments against it are "esports-reasons" and for this to be a consistent decision the things I mentioned should also be forbidden.
It's like you initially said: It's a collectors item and there is no better use for it than in the AT. Because thats where everyone gives the most. This was a change that did not just happen when a patch came. It was announced. In EVE, preparation and dedication pay off: This means a team that started planning for the AT so long ago should be rewarded.
Forcing 13 charge ASB ships to be announced would be useful though. Which is easily done by forcing people to do so before the match starts, when everybody is inside the arena (basically the point of time, when you can see if the enemy is fielding a flag ship or not). |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |