Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Aegon Blackfire
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
20
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 17:11:00 -
[31] - Quote
Faife wrote:since everyone else is double posting:
you guys should let us use 6%s, zors, and other named implants. anything to raise DPS up and give non-drone teams a shot is a good idea.
also, lower the cost on recons. there's a reason that like 3 flew in AT total
We are discussing this. We have not yet reached a decision quite yet . However, as it stands the tournament ui is currently configured to allow 3% implants, so even if the SCL staff do decide to allow 6% hardwirings, etc. I am not sure we would be due to the technical aspects of the ui. |
Aegon Blackfire
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
20
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 17:14:00 -
[32] - Quote
Ryu Chaos wrote:Any chance to do it on duality?
We cannot. Duality is part of CCPs rotation of floating test servers and they can't promise that it will be kept in a state that is ready for use. |
Elise Randolph
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
1138
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 21:03:00 -
[33] - Quote
Elendar wrote:Bam Stroker wrote:I couldn't see this explicitly in the rules (that's a big wall of text so sorry if I missed it) but is there a limit on the number of characters that each team can have on their roster? As for the change from 8 to 10 people this was done to bring SCL closer to the meta of the alliance tournament; ideally we want the tournament metagame to evolve over time and be reasonably consistent between tournaments so teams can adapt over time not just over single weekends leading to setups like tinker and drones being countered by setups and skill rather than points changes or hard bans.
That sounds good, but the actions of SCL don't really line up with this "meta-preserving" message. I mean no team can adapt to Tinker setups in the SCL because Tinker teams were deemed Not Fun To Watch by the SCL and have been banned from as a result. Especially ironic since the Tinker and the newly emerging Tinker-Control archetype, which has essentially become one of the few core tournament archetypes, was one of the ways we saw Drone-based teams countered. Teams that did well in SCL knew perfectly well how to get around Tinkers in ATXI.
I will continue to participate in SCL because it's a fun thing to do, but after canceling SCL 4 with 3 days notice and implementing a draconian archetype banning policy, it is becoming more clear that SCL is very far removed from "Eve Tournament prep" ~ |
Apathetic Brent
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
40
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 21:59:00 -
[34] - Quote
Elise Randolph wrote:Elendar wrote:Bam Stroker wrote:I couldn't see this explicitly in the rules (that's a big wall of text so sorry if I missed it) but is there a limit on the number of characters that each team can have on their roster? As for the change from 8 to 10 people this was done to bring SCL closer to the meta of the alliance tournament; ideally we want the tournament metagame to evolve over time and be reasonably consistent between tournaments so teams can adapt over time not just over single weekends leading to setups like tinker and drones being countered by setups and skill rather than points changes or hard bans. That sounds good, but the actions of SCL don't really line up with this "meta-preserving" message. I mean no team can adapt to Tinker setups in the SCL because Tinker teams were deemed Not Fun To Watch by the SCL and have been hard-banned as a result. Especially ironic since the Tinker, which has essentially become one of the few core tournament archetypes, was one of the ways we saw Drone-based teams countered. Teams that did well in SCL knew perfectly well how to get around Tinkers in ATXI as a direct result of their involvement and some teams even toyed with Tinker-Control crossovers. But now...not so much. I will continue to participate in SCL because it's a fun thing to do, but after canceling SCL 4 with 3 days notice and implementing a draconian archetype banning policy, it is becoming more clear that SCL is very far removed from "Eve Tournament prep"
I do apologize for the short notice on the cancellation of SCL 4. As to your other point about banning, when have we ever been anything but flexible? We really really appreciate your continued support, and if any of these new implementations become an issue we're more than willing to review and/or revise. |
Namamai
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
191
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 22:07:00 -
[35] - Quote
Elise Randolph wrote:That sounds good, but the actions of SCL don't really line up with this "meta-preserving" message. I mean no team can adapt to Tinker setups in the SCL because Tinker teams were deemed Not Fun To Watch by the SCL and have been hard-banned as a result. Especially ironic since the Tinker, which has essentially become one of the few core tournament archetypes, was one of the ways we saw Drone-based teams countered. Teams that did well in SCL knew perfectly well how to get around Tinkers in ATXI as a direct result of their involvement and some teams even toyed with Tinker-Control crossovers. But now...not so much.
I will continue to participate in SCL because it's a fun thing to do, but after canceling SCL 4 with 3 days notice and implementing a draconian archetype banning policy, it is becoming more clear that SCL is very far removed from "Eve Tournament prep" First, the serious answer as an SCL representative:
As you know, SCL4 will be taking place on Sisi, which almost certainly will have Odyssey 1.1 mechanics. Odyssey 1.1 will include significant changes to the strength of tanking ganglinks, as well as significant buffs to local armor tanking. Given these changes, we were not 100% confident of how the Tinker meta would change; we felt that it was a safer choice to ban it for SCL4, in case Tinkers became significantly overpowered as a result of the local tank changes.
If it turns out that energy transfer Tinkers are not overpowered in 1.1, we will consider allowing them again for SCL5.
Furthermore, Tinkers can technically be built with nos instead of energy transfers. (Since your team fielded a nos-based tinker in the Fanfest PvP tournament, I'm sure that you're already aware of its strengths and weaknesses.) That meta is still available to you, should you choose to run it.
---
Next, the less serious answer as a member of Rote:
"BAWWWWW, I can't take a three-month-old winning meta and copy-paste it into tournaments and collect first prize with no thought." God forbid you actually have to theorycraft for a new environment. Abloobloobloo.
But let's be honest: the only reason you like tinker setups is because it guarantees that you won't fly out of the arena. |
Elise Randolph
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
1140
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 23:07:00 -
[36] - Quote
Namamai wrote:Elise Randolph wrote:That sounds good, but the actions of SCL don't really line up with this "meta-preserving" message. I mean no team can adapt to Tinker setups in the SCL because Tinker teams were deemed Not Fun To Watch by the SCL and have been hard-banned as a result. Especially ironic since the Tinker, which has essentially become one of the few core tournament archetypes, was one of the ways we saw Drone-based teams countered. Teams that did well in SCL knew perfectly well how to get around Tinkers in ATXI as a direct result of their involvement and some teams even toyed with Tinker-Control crossovers. But now...not so much.
I will continue to participate in SCL because it's a fun thing to do, but after canceling SCL 4 with 3 days notice and implementing a draconian archetype banning policy, it is becoming more clear that SCL is very far removed from "Eve Tournament prep" First, the serious answer as an SCL representative: As you know, SCL4 will be taking place on Sisi, which almost certainly will have Odyssey 1.1 mechanics. Odyssey 1.1 will include significant changes to the strength of tanking ganglinks, as well as significant buffs to local armor tanking. Given these changes, we were not 100% confident of how the Tinker meta would change; we felt that it was a safer choice to ban it for SCL4, in case Tinkers became significantly overpowered as a result of the local tank changes. If it turns out that energy transfer Tinkers are not overpowered in Odyssey 1.1, we will consider allowing them again for SCL5. (FWIW, I personally think that 1.1 in its current form will be a nerf to Tinkers. But, 1.1 is not yet set in stone, and banning them was the safe choice for today.) Furthermore, Tinkers can technically be built with nos instead of energy transfers. (Since your team fielded a nos-based tinker in the Fanfest PvP tournament, I'm sure that you're already aware of its strengths and weaknesses.) That meta is still available to you, should you choose to run it. --- Next, the less serious answer as a member of Rote: "BAWWWWW, I can't take a three-month-old winning meta and copy-paste it into tournaments and collect first prize with no thought." God forbid you actually have to theorycraft for a new environment. Abloobloobloo. But let's be honest: the only reason you like tinker setups is because it guarantees that you won't fly out of the arena.
While "we're banning tinkers because their tank gets categorically worse, but you can still tinker anyway nerd because you sort of did it in 6-mans " is quite a funny response, I was referring to this statement:
Quote:As for the change from 8 to 10 people this was done to bring SCL closer to the meta of the alliance tournament; ideally we want the tournament metagame to evolve over time and be reasonably consistent between tournaments so teams can adapt over time not just over single weekends leading to setups like tinker and drones being countered by setups and skill rather than points changes or hard bans.
SCL is quite free to ban whatever they deem Not Fun, it's just hypocritical to simultaneously ban an archetype and masquerade as some AT/NEO resource. I find it bizarre that SCL duders are so adamant about hiding behind these made-up reasons for banning Tinker teams. Now the reason is "Odyssey 1.1 changes makes it very confusing", yet HACs and Command Ships get a significant change and the points layout just stays there. Just say "hi it's boring to commentate two tinker teams so we're banning them, get dunked you noskill tinker trash" and end it instead of beating around the bush with a different non-nonsensical excuse each time.
SCL is fun to compete in, I'm glad it's around. Just embrace the by-the-seat-of-your-pants nature and stop trying to trick yourselves that you're something you're not. ~ |
Alsyth
82
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 00:08:00 -
[37] - Quote
AT/NEO could also adopt this "no energy transfer rule" and ban tinkers, so I don't see how SCL experimenting makes it less of a preparation for AT.
SCL should experiment even more to force us to adapt in my opinion. With 1.1, and winter expansion with changes to EAS, marauders, etc. learning to adapt is the best SCL can provide.
Fixing the tinker is good. Fixing the sentry OPness would be good (wider arena, limiting to one DLA...) Changing points for some underused ships (EAS bombers & Recons) would be good too. |
Namamai
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
192
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 00:09:00 -
[38] - Quote
Elise Randolph wrote: SCL is quite free to ban whatever they deem Not Fun, it's just hypocritical to simultaneously ban an archetype and masquerade as some AT/NEO resource. I find it bizarre that SCL duders are so adamant about hiding behind these made-up reasons for banning Tinker teams. Now the reason is "Odyssey 1.1 changes makes it very confusing", yet HACs and Command Ships get a significant change and the points layout just stays there. Just say "hi it's boring to commentate two tinker teams so we're banning them, get dunked you noskill tinker trash" and end it instead of beating around the bush with a different non-nonsensical excuse each time.
SCL is fun to compete in, I'm glad it's around. Just embrace the by-the-seat-of-your-pants nature and stop trying to trick yourselves that you're something you're not.
You seem to think we're just shrugging and letting the dice roll. Please allow me to correct that.
HACs have stayed at their old point values for a reason. While HACs may be improving in the general Eve landscape, we believe that most of the changes do not significantly affect tournament meta. (I don't expect anyone to field Vagabonds, for example, or active-tanked Deimoses.) The only HAC that may be broken at its current point value is the Ishtar -- and we're willing to wait and see, and adjust as needed for SCL5.
The Command Ships are a bit more debatable, especially since traditionally we've only seen a few of them used frequently in previous tourneys. The Sleipnir has gotten slightly worse, the Eos has gotten significantly better, the Damn and Claymore a little better. Speaking strictly personally, I think CSes could afford to be bumped up by one point; however, as a group, we'd prefer predictability. Again, the fact that we're trying to run more frequently than AT affords us a bit of flexibility. We can see how the meta develops this month, and if things are broken, there's always the next SCL.
As for the rest of your response, I'll just say: You seem to be excessively incensed. I suggest some Chivalry. |
Apathetic Brent
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
40
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 03:52:00 -
[39] - Quote
Not only that, but we're wanting to keep HAC point the way they are because we want to see them fielded. If they're OP we want the participants to exploit them so that the rest of EVE can get a preview of what's coming up.
Edit: To a certain extent we've always manipulated points towards what we want to see fielded. For instance; Faction battleships and bombers in SCL 3. Half of the determining factors when it comes to point values come from trying to "balance" things, and the other half come from what do we want to see teams fielding. We want it to be an ever changing landscape where people can explore their options. |
Alsyth
82
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 11:14:00 -
[40] - Quote
So I guess you are fine with recons, bombers, BCs, T1 logis and EAS not being used at all, and are content with Gila & Navy Vexor being the only faction cruisers used (with few vigilants). You also love this sentry meta and want to see it dominate SCL4? |
|
Straife
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
5
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 12:38:00 -
[41] - Quote
Namamai wrote:You seem to think we're just shrugging and letting the dice roll...
...We can see how the meta develops this month, and if things are broken, there's always the next SCL.
Pretty sure the second line is the definition of letting the dice roll on the point layout. |
Apathetic Brent
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
40
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 12:55:00 -
[42] - Quote
Why is everyone so angry |
DeadDuck
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
60
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 13:26:00 -
[43] - Quote
At what time the draw results will be known ?
TY |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1759
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 14:31:00 -
[44] - Quote
Apathetic Brent wrote:Why is everyone so angry
Pretty sure its due to draconian rules you're putting in for no apparent reason at all other than 'you want to'.
Hell the guy on the last page said that they're nerfing tinkers for 1.1 but you're banning them anyway because you're afraid they'll be stronger.
WTF is that?
Adding extra hoakey rules that are basically just whining in rule form makes teams like Hydra and PL go out of their way to find things to make your life worse, I'm not sure why that other guy has to be such a broke back dickhead about it to Elise but hey, we'll just try and win all your tourneys as payback.
So that way you can render yourself free of legitimacy by instituting the "No PL rule", which we will of course circumvent with alts. |
Bob Shaftoes
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
18
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 18:04:00 -
[45] - Quote
Man this thread is pretty :popcorn:
I like most of the rule changes. Added to the Ody 1.1 changes it should make SCL 4 fairly interesting and different from the AT.
Not sure how I feel about the 10 man teams though. I also feel with the geddon and domi being how they are, tech 1 BS need to be bumped up by a point to 18. |
Aegon Blackfire
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
21
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 18:32:00 -
[46] - Quote
DeadDuck wrote:At what time the draw results will be known ?
TY
Friday the 23rd of August. I'll post them up probably around 0100 to 0300. |
MissBolyai
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
55
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 21:19:00 -
[47] - Quote
Apathetic Brent wrote:Why is everyone so angry Remember how angry you were when we won ATXI?
;) |
Apathetic Brent
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
41
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 21:38:00 -
[48] - Quote
MissBolyai wrote:Apathetic Brent wrote:Why is everyone so angry Remember how angry you were when we won ATXI? ;)
I wasn't angry. A bit sad maybe. Not angry tho. |
Arch Stanton's Neighbour
Forceful Resource Acquisition Inc
68
|
Posted - 2013.08.17 02:58:00 -
[49] - Quote
Apathetic Brent wrote:MissBolyai wrote:Apathetic Brent wrote:Why is everyone so angry Remember how angry you were when we won ATXI? ;) I wasn't angry. A bit sad maybe. Not angry tho. Would you say you were... almost apathetic? |
Apathetic Brent
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
41
|
Posted - 2013.08.17 05:59:00 -
[50] - Quote
Arch Stanton's Neighbour wrote:Apathetic Brent wrote:MissBolyai wrote:Apathetic Brent wrote:Why is everyone so angry Remember how angry you were when we won ATXI? ;) I wasn't angry. A bit sad maybe. Not angry tho. Would you say you were... almost apathetic?
:rimshot: It's such a stupid name xD |
|
Hendrick Tallardar
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
32
|
Posted - 2013.08.17 19:02:00 -
[51] - Quote
Will there be ads running akin to AT, if so when are those expected to be delivered by and what are the codecs/aspect ratios and so forth you have set as a minimum? LeeSsang. Never Forget. |
Faife
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
111
|
Posted - 2013.08.17 21:43:00 -
[52] - Quote
Apathetic Brent wrote:Why is everyone so angry
i don't know. why do you think we're annoyed? |
ry ry
Snuff Box Urine Alliance
293
|
Posted - 2013.08.19 19:29:00 -
[53] - Quote
this thread.
ANYWAY! CCP any chance of a more recent mirror of sisi? the current one is a couple of months old, and i guess it'd be more helpful to the SCL to run the mirror sooner rather than later. |
Anaphylacti
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
15
|
Posted - 2013.08.20 20:30:00 -
[54] - Quote
So Flagships play a more important role in the meta now rather than "you can fit shinies on it" can we still have flagships in scl4?
Being able to force a comp through despite a ban is a big part of this years AT and your attempt at preserving the meta (besides the fact that you are trying to kill one of the main comps because its boring...) won't hold if you don't keep up with this rule...
It doesn't have to be faction fit, although faction mods are hard to come by on sisi anyway, but you need to at least give us the option to declare a flagship. |
TAckermassacker
New Republic
16
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 13:32:00 -
[55] - Quote
stop waiting do it now |
Faife
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
111
|
Posted - 2013.08.23 18:17:00 -
[56] - Quote
ry ry wrote:this thread.
ANYWAY! CCP any chance of a more recent mirror of sisi? the current one is a couple of months old, and i guess it'd be more helpful to the SCL to run the mirror sooner rather than later.
Let's not, I don't want to rebuild my ships. |
EVE-Bet Kryptyk
Eve-Bet
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.12 04:32:00 -
[57] - Quote
Betting for 4 first matches is now live - http://www.eve-bet.com/Betting/BrowseEvent.aspx?eventId=374
We'll cover every much for the weekend. All in proper fixed odds format just like we did for ATXI |
Ryhss
Dry Atomic Fusion Gatekeepers Universe
108
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 17:42:00 -
[58] - Quote
Will it be "televised"?(YouTube, EveTV) I have been known to spam trade windows with spammers of Jita. It is quite satisfying when they convo you screaming about reporting me for it. It normally provokes me to open another trade window with them. |
Faife
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
114
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 17:56:00 -
[59] - Quote
Ryhss wrote:Will it be "televised"?(YouTube, EveTV)
@TEST_general is livetweeting it. |
Lorkin Desal
Lone Star Exploration Lone Star Partners
150
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 18:43:00 -
[60] - Quote
Ryhss wrote:Will it be "televised"?(YouTube, EveTV)
streamed over twitch |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |