hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 127

Thread: AT XIII Day 4 chat/prediction/betting/shitposting

  1. #81

    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    [TSKRS]
    Posts
    3,233
    Quote Originally Posted by Jester View Post
    The final way AT ships swing matches is the sales of ATs allow you to acquire better comps and better pilots (the latter being attracted to alliances that have a good chance of winning AT ships).
    This really isn't a thing, you know. A few guys left Rote when it imploded and wound up in Exodus/Turn Left/Hydra. That's not evidence of some scheme to poach the best pilots from up-and-coming teams, it's natural player churn. Most of the other non-PL/Hydra/Camel teams have had their core guys in place for years.

  2. #82
    root's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 26, 2011
    Location
    The Camel Empire
    Posts
    3,090
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Spending 100bil or so on a at ship which can die is obviously no problem for teams that have come first or third at least once, spending 100bil is a huge problem for quite a few teams.
    How many man-hours are 100bil for a dedicated team? Lets say if they would run incursions together. (including lp)
    The Rapier is my love boat
    ~lowsec smallscale pvp 'n stuff~

  3. #83

    Join Date
    June 15, 2011
    Location
    SHDWC
    Posts
    273
    I quite like to see them used, perhaps you could treat them like flagships though so only one of each type per setup and if you lose one you can't bring that particular hull again. So if warlords lose a malice, they can still bring chameleons?

    Anyway not too bothered, malices are maybe a bit op but it was some silly decisions that cost us our match more than the etana

  4. #84
    Grath's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 14, 2013
    Posts
    1,202
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    I also really dont get your adversity (yours and the few camel/hydra folks who commented about the issue) to banning them
    Because its the single best place to use them?

    On TQ they'll always get instahunted and are essentially useless shit just waiting to get 50 blops dumped on it, in the Tourney, you know, where you go to WIN the ships, they shine, and get used and killed.


    Like seriously there aren't ANY at ships not sold on the open market, claiming that only a few teams can have them is bullshit, any team that wants one bad enough can source one, its a matter of how bad they want it vs how good it might make certain set ups.

    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Grath View Post
    Tourney ships are fine, unless you're wolf here who's constant complaint over the years is that variety is killing eve and there should be less ships and a more even playing ground for all to prove who's king of the mountain.
    Do you agree with their points values? Or should they be increased to scale with their effectiveness?
    A lot of point values this year seemed kinda odd but it is what it is, you work to build a team in the point values you're allotted, if they change those the good teams will build good comps out of the new values. I'm never against point value changes within reason because at the end of the day our nerds will still crank out good 12 man comps that fall in whatever we've got for a pool of points.
    Last edited by Grath; August 24 2015 at 03:35:36 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marlona Sky View Post
    What do you say, Grath? If I private message you some information about my family and me, would you become my spokesperson in confirming I'm telling the truth?

  5. #85
    sturm gewehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 16, 2012
    Posts
    33
    Talent migration for AT is a thing, probably not as common as Jester thinks but it happens. Sometimes its intentional, sometimes it is a by product of wanting to fly with friends on TQ or with a group of good pilots (natural churn). I argue AT success attracts pilots more by prestige than potential payouts. A lot of players equate personal success in game to their ticker.

    In my experience as someone who has been on a different AT team every year from AT X-XII and has seen others migrate/churn it really is mostly a case of disgruntled players who put a lot of effort into the AT not meshing well with the group they are in (culture, effort discrepancy, talent discrepancy, not feeling valued or respected, etc.). Sometimes individuals just don't fit so they try somewhere else.

    The "Great Rote Kapelle Talent Migration" was mostly a result of regular TQ issues. Players were driven out because they weren't happy with the direction of the alliance and weren't being treated well. I don't think any of the players who left to join alliances with good AT teams did it primarily for AT aspirations; ships, prestige or otherwise (I didn't).

    Also I wouldn't recruit anyone whose primary motive is AT ships, I doubt most elite teams would either.

  6. #86

    Join Date
    June 20, 2014
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by Grath View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    I also really dont get your adversity (yours and the few camel/hydra folks who commented about the issue) to banning them
    Because its the single best place to use them?

    On TQ they'll always get instahunted and are essentially useless shit just waiting to get 50 blops dumped on it, in the Tourney, you know, where you go to WIN the ships, they shine, and get used and killed.


    Like seriously there aren't ANY at ships not sold on the open market, claiming that only a few teams can have them is bullshit, any team that wants one bad enough can source one, its a matter of how bad they want it vs how good it might make certain set ups.

    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Grath View Post
    Tourney ships are fine, unless you're wolf here who's constant complaint over the years is that variety is killing eve and there should be less ships and a more even playing ground for all to prove who's king of the mountain.
    Do you agree with their points values? Or should they be increased to scale with their effectiveness?
    A lot of point values this year seemed kinda odd but it is what it is, you work to build a team in the point values you're allotted, if they change those the good teams will build good comps out of the new values. I'm never against point value changes within reason because at the end of the day our nerds will still crank out good 12 man comps that fall in whatever we've got for a pool of points.
    vs having the balls to actually use it

  7. #87

    Join Date
    September 7, 2014
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    The piloting skill simply is so similar that the car itself is way more important then a pilot beeing 1 or 2% better.
    You're horribly wrong here. If you watch how people fly (even on top-tier teams), you will be surprised by amount of stupid mistakes they make.

    I'd gladly agree to have people who don't do these mistakes and give up using uniques as compensation, with this trade I'd have much better chances to win.

    EVE is not f1 after all, and most people (even some players on AT teams) are not as good at EVE as f1 pilots at racing.

  8. #88

    Join Date
    May 31, 2011
    Posts
    3,876
    Quote Originally Posted by GiDiYi View Post
    There's a point to it, but as far as I can remember the last Camel match was the first match I've seen where an AT ship really swung the match.
    My guess is that a few more matches were decided by one team fielding AT price ships: the opposite time suddenly recognizes a blinky AT ship in their opponent's fleet and greed/ambition take over: "AT SHIP!! PRIMARY!! KILL IT!!". Without considering if bringing down that rare ship first helps you win this battle.

  9. #89
    W0lf Crendraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 26, 2012
    Location
    The United
    Posts
    8,970
    Quote Originally Posted by root View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Spending 100bil or so on a at ship which can die is obviously no problem for teams that have come first or third at least once, spending 100bil is a huge problem for quite a few teams.
    How many man-hours are 100bil for a dedicated team? Lets say if they would run incursions together. (including lp)
    A ton, and if you want 2 etanas in case one dies (like how pl will field another one, probably), + 2 malice (which dont get traded back and forth between teams) +maaaybe 2 cambions you are looking at absurd isk grinding for your team. And thats given that someone is stupid enough to sell a etana to a serious contender.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    I see you have read nietzsche's little known work "beyond boobs and butts".

  10. #90
    W0lf Crendraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 26, 2012
    Location
    The United
    Posts
    8,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Kadesh View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    The piloting skill simply is so similar that the car itself is way more important then a pilot beeing 1 or 2% better.
    You're horribly wrong here. If you watch how people fly (even on top-tier teams), you will be surprised by amount of stupid mistakes they make.

    I'd gladly agree to have people who don't do these mistakes and give up using uniques as compensation, with this trade I'd have much better chances to win.

    EVE is not f1 after all, and most people (even some players on AT teams) are not as good at EVE as f1 pilots at racing.
    Iirc a f1 driver is called a pilot as well (at least in some languages). I was referring to that not to the actual eve players, no AT team played perfectly so far, not even close to it.


    For me it simply comes down to: 2 team with similar skill levels, similar theory crafting levels, similar fcs skillwise - the one with the at ships will win more often. Which is bad for eve as an esport.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    I see you have read nietzsche's little known work "beyond boobs and butts".

  11. #91
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    16,206
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kadesh View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    The piloting skill simply is so similar that the car itself is way more important then a pilot beeing 1 or 2% better.
    You're horribly wrong here. If you watch how people fly (even on top-tier teams), you will be surprised by amount of stupid mistakes they make.

    I'd gladly agree to have people who don't do these mistakes and give up using uniques as compensation, with this trade I'd have much better chances to win.

    EVE is not f1 after all, and most people (even some players on AT teams) are not as good at EVE as f1 pilots at racing.
    Iirc a f1 driver is called a pilot as well (at least in some languages). I was referring to that not to the actual eve players, no AT team played perfectly so far, not even close to it.


    For me it simply comes down to: 2 team with similar skill levels, similar theory crafting levels, similar fcs skillwise - the one with the at ships will win more often. Which is bad for eve as an esport.
    Surely the Alliance Tournament is a measure of the competence of an alliance. The economic strength of an alliance is surely a measure of its competency?
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Mason
    It is absurd that we are capable of witnessing a 40,000 year old system of gender oppression begin to dissolve before our eyes yet still see the abolition of a 200 year old economic system as an unrealistic utopia.

  12. #92
    W0lf Crendraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 26, 2012
    Location
    The United
    Posts
    8,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kadesh View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    The piloting skill simply is so similar that the car itself is way more important then a pilot beeing 1 or 2% better.
    You're horribly wrong here. If you watch how people fly (even on top-tier teams), you will be surprised by amount of stupid mistakes they make.

    I'd gladly agree to have people who don't do these mistakes and give up using uniques as compensation, with this trade I'd have much better chances to win.

    EVE is not f1 after all, and most people (even some players on AT teams) are not as good at EVE as f1 pilots at racing.
    Iirc a f1 driver is called a pilot as well (at least in some languages). I was referring to that not to the actual eve players, no AT team played perfectly so far, not even close to it.


    For me it simply comes down to: 2 team with similar skill levels, similar theory crafting levels, similar fcs skillwise - the one with the at ships will win more often. Which is bad for eve as an esport.
    Surely the Alliance Tournament is a measure of the competence of an alliance. The economic strength of an alliance is surely a measure of its competency?
    That still puts a huge advantage on the winner of previous ats, a pvp focused alliance may be good but they dont have the funds to play. Pl or hydra winning or coming second in ats puts (given 100bil per ship) about 5 trillion isk into their pockets, trying to compete with that is not possible for small alliances. They [ccp] have alread stated that they dont want the at to be about isk, but atm it is - at the highest level.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    I see you have read nietzsche's little known work "beyond boobs and butts".

  13. #93
    W0lf Crendraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 26, 2012
    Location
    The United
    Posts
    8,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Grath View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    I also really dont get your adversity (yours and the few camel/hydra folks who commented about the issue) to banning them
    Because its the single best place to use them?

    On TQ they'll always get instahunted and are essentially useless shit just waiting to get 50 blops dumped on it, in the Tourney, you know, where you go to WIN the ships, they shine, and get used and killed.


    Like seriously there aren't ANY at ships not sold on the open market, claiming that only a few teams can have them is bullshit, any team that wants one bad enough can source one, its a matter of how bad they want it vs how good it might make certain set ups.

    .
    Well i sort of disagree on the last part, beeing forced to pve four hundreds of hours just to compete in a pvp tournament seems like a crap idea.


    On the rest i agree, getting awesome ships and not beeing able to use them is a shame, and the AT is the only environement you can savely use them in, but id rather have a really fair AT rather then see use of these awesome ships. And as fozzie has stated the AT puts severe limits on what can be done with AT ships. You cant simply create a ranis that can fit Neutron blaster cannons with a gun resolution migation bonus making it a frig weapon and a double faloff bonus coupled with a huge tank , i.e a 5km/s preheat ceptor doing 1k dps at 40+40 with frigate tracking with 10k ehp as that would totally break the at. But if they all were banned you could get one of those - and throw in scrams putting out mwd immunity instead of bubble immunity on top and wreck totall havok on tq till after 500 kills someone hardcounters you.

    Just imagine what they could do if they wouldnt have to keep the AT in mind, prenanonerf vagabons, 20 drone domis, 0 cd and 0 spooluptime mjd cruiser and on and on and on.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    I see you have read nietzsche's little known work "beyond boobs and butts".

  14. #94
    roigon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 23, 2012
    Location
    c4mel, Ostingele
    Posts
    1,690
    I have a gigantic boner for the AT. But I left agony for a corp that had (at the time) no AT plans. I would have been a shoe'in for yearly AT attendance in agony, and agony is at the very least around AT X a solid mid-tier AT team. But leaving a corp just because of AT is unlikely in my opinion. I'm sure it can contribute, but it's never going to be the full story.

    Then a year later FEIGN got off it's balls and got an AT team together.

    If we had wanted it, we could have acquired AT ships as well. The topic came up in planning and arrangements where made for it to be possible. Yes it takes a shitload of ISK, but if you make arrangements a lot of things are possible. Collectively even small corps can generate a shit ton of ISK. I know in agony we ran incursions for a few months to build up an AT budget.

    As someone in the thread mentioned earlier , it's the alliance tournament, not dota/lol with eve sauce. Would it be really cool to have a more equal playing field, sure. But that's simply not what the AT is at this point in time. Is it equal enough? I'd say yes. If you have the balls and are willing to put down the money/effort you can acquire the ships.

    As for AT ships and their usage in the AT. I wouldn't mind seeing their point cost tweaked, but only slightly. Like 1 point more or something. It's still a shit ton of money and balls being put on the grid.
    Last edited by roigon; August 24 2015 at 05:24:28 PM.

  15. #95
    Suleiman Shouaa's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    [TSKRS]
    Posts
    864
    AT ships should probably cost more points. Kind of hard to settle on what that increase should be as they really vary in effectiveness - Malice is far more effective than an Freki, but they're both AFs. +2 points for each of them is probably reasonable - would make an Etana cost almost as much as an Tengu (T3 Cruisers should really cost 15 points, but that's a story for another day) and the AFs as much as T3Ds. Still, really insane value for points, but it wouldn't allow you (except for the Malice anyway) to run a much better ship at much lower points cost allowing for an even stronger comp.

    Quote Originally Posted by root View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Spending 100bil or so on a at ship which can die is obviously no problem for teams that have come first or third at least once, spending 100bil is a huge problem for quite a few teams.
    How many man-hours are 100bil for a dedicated team? Lets say if they would run incursions together. (including lp)
    If it's so easy to get 100B (and subsequently buy AT ships), then why are you & Hydra trading Malices between yourselves in matches? AT ships are pretty limited - between collectors who probably hold 5-10 between them, the teams who won them holding onto a few and the ones lost thus far there's probably not many available on the open market. At least for those which are competitive in the AT.

  16. #96
    Jester's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Elite, vicinity of Altair
    Posts
    1,988
    Quote Originally Posted by sturm gewehr View Post
    Talent migration for AT is a thing, probably not as common as Jester thinks but it happens. Sometimes its intentional, sometimes it is a by product of wanting to fly with friends on TQ or with a group of good pilots (natural churn). I argue AT success attracts pilots more by prestige than potential payouts. A lot of players equate personal success in game to their ticker.
    Yep, this is a good way of putting it. Correlation rather than causation, if you prefer to look at it that way. And I'm not saying it's hugely common, but it does happen.

    Quote Originally Posted by sturm gewehr View Post
    In my experience as someone who has been on a different AT team every year from AT X-XII and has seen others migrate/churn it really is mostly a case of disgruntled players who put a lot of effort into the AT not meshing well with the group they are in (culture, effort discrepancy, talent discrepancy, not feeling valued or respected, etc.). Sometimes individuals just don't fit so they try somewhere else.
    Again, yes. The way I've put this in the past is "It doesn't matter a bit how much effort you put into the AT if you're not on the right team."

    Quote Originally Posted by sturm gewehr View Post
    The "Great Rote Kapelle Talent Migration" was mostly a result of regular TQ issues. Players were driven out because they weren't happy with the direction of the alliance and weren't being treated well. I don't think any of the players who left to join alliances with good AT teams did it primarily for AT aspirations; ships, prestige or otherwise (I didn't).
    I agree with the first part, not so sure I agree with the second. Yeah, I was aggravated by this when it happened because I always felt the Rote team was always one screwed up match away from finally getting into the top four. We were forever losing a truly outstanding AT pilot or two for every one we gained... and completely coincidentally those outstanding AT pilots always seemed to move from Rote to an outstanding AT alliance. You'd be hard-pressed to convince me that Brent didn't switch alliances motivated more or less solely by the prospect of an AT win, for instance.

    In the time since I've gotten over it, no doubt helped along by my own (outside-assisted) departure from Rote. Believe it or not, my earlier post was a generalized comment, not anything specifically aimed at the "Great Rote Kapelle Talent Migration" (great phrase, BTW).
    Ripard Teg (among others)... what's our new alliance called again?
    I was once Deemed Worthy To Wield The Banhammer, to good effect. Or at least, that's what most of EVE believes.

  17. #97
    root's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 26, 2011
    Location
    The Camel Empire
    Posts
    3,090
    I might be wrong, but I pretty sure Brent switched because he is attracted to l0rd carlos on a sexual level that rote members never could reach.
    The Rapier is my love boat
    ~lowsec smallscale pvp 'n stuff~

  18. #98
    sturm gewehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 16, 2012
    Posts
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by Jester View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sturm gewehr View Post
    Talent migration for AT is a thing, probably not as common as Jester thinks but it happens. Sometimes its intentional, sometimes it is a by product of wanting to fly with friends on TQ or with a group of good pilots (natural churn). I argue AT success attracts pilots more by prestige than potential payouts. A lot of players equate personal success in game to their ticker.
    Yep, this is a good way of putting it. Correlation rather than causation, if you prefer to look at it that way. And I'm not saying it's hugely common, but it does happen.

    Quote Originally Posted by sturm gewehr View Post
    In my experience as someone who has been on a different AT team every year from AT X-XII and has seen others migrate/churn it really is mostly a case of disgruntled players who put a lot of effort into the AT not meshing well with the group they are in (culture, effort discrepancy, talent discrepancy, not feeling valued or respected, etc.). Sometimes individuals just don't fit so they try somewhere else.
    Again, yes. The way I've put this in the past is "It doesn't matter a bit how much effort you put into the AT if you're not on the right team."

    Quote Originally Posted by sturm gewehr View Post
    The "Great Rote Kapelle Talent Migration" was mostly a result of regular TQ issues. Players were driven out because they weren't happy with the direction of the alliance and weren't being treated well. I don't think any of the players who left to join alliances with good AT teams did it primarily for AT aspirations; ships, prestige or otherwise (I didn't).
    I agree with the first part, not so sure I agree with the second. Yeah, I was aggravated by this when it happened because I always felt the Rote team was always one screwed up match away from finally getting into the top four. We were forever losing a truly outstanding AT pilot or two for every one we gained... and completely coincidentally those outstanding AT pilots always seemed to move from Rote to an outstanding AT alliance. You'd be hard-pressed to convince me that Brent didn't switch alliances motivated more or less solely by the prospect of an AT win, for instance.

    In the time since I've gotten over it, no doubt helped along by my own (outside-assisted) departure from Rote. Believe it or not, my earlier post was a generalized comment, not anything specifically aimed at the "Great Rote Kapelle Talent Migration" (great phrase, BTW).
    There were definitely incidents of pilots being mistreated, Rote was an abusive alliance (often to pilots who were consistent content generators or who put fourth a lot of AT effort). I know this because I was often guilty of it, its something we prided ourselves on.

    Not all our outstanding AT pilots ended up on good AT teams (Namamai).

    I mentioned Rote AT because it is a point you (and others) have frequently brought up in the past.

    Brent would probably be the one case of a pilot who left primarily for AT purposes, I don't know for certain.

    EDIT: Happy to hear that you have since moved on to a place that fits you better.
    Last edited by sturm gewehr; August 24 2015 at 07:27:59 PM.

  19. #99
    Proxay's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by sturm gewehr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jester View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sturm gewehr View Post
    Talent migration for AT is a thing, probably not as common as Jester thinks but it happens. Sometimes its intentional, sometimes it is a by product of wanting to fly with friends on TQ or with a group of good pilots (natural churn). I argue AT success attracts pilots more by prestige than potential payouts. A lot of players equate personal success in game to their ticker.
    Yep, this is a good way of putting it. Correlation rather than causation, if you prefer to look at it that way. And I'm not saying it's hugely common, but it does happen.

    Quote Originally Posted by sturm gewehr View Post
    In my experience as someone who has been on a different AT team every year from AT X-XII and has seen others migrate/churn it really is mostly a case of disgruntled players who put a lot of effort into the AT not meshing well with the group they are in (culture, effort discrepancy, talent discrepancy, not feeling valued or respected, etc.). Sometimes individuals just don't fit so they try somewhere else.
    Again, yes. The way I've put this in the past is "It doesn't matter a bit how much effort you put into the AT if you're not on the right team."

    Quote Originally Posted by sturm gewehr View Post
    The "Great Rote Kapelle Talent Migration" was mostly a result of regular TQ issues. Players were driven out because they weren't happy with the direction of the alliance and weren't being treated well. I don't think any of the players who left to join alliances with good AT teams did it primarily for AT aspirations; ships, prestige or otherwise (I didn't).
    I agree with the first part, not so sure I agree with the second. Yeah, I was aggravated by this when it happened because I always felt the Rote team was always one screwed up match away from finally getting into the top four. We were forever losing a truly outstanding AT pilot or two for every one we gained... and completely coincidentally those outstanding AT pilots always seemed to move from Rote to an outstanding AT alliance. You'd be hard-pressed to convince me that Brent didn't switch alliances motivated more or less solely by the prospect of an AT win, for instance.

    In the time since I've gotten over it, no doubt helped along by my own (outside-assisted) departure from Rote. Believe it or not, my earlier post was a generalized comment, not anything specifically aimed at the "Great Rote Kapelle Talent Migration" (great phrase, BTW).
    There were definitely incidents of pilots being mistreated, Rote was an abusive alliance (often to pilots who were consistent content generators or who put fourth a lot of AT effort). I know this because I was often guilty of it, its something we prided ourselves on.

    Not all our outstanding AT pilots ended up on good AT teams (Namamai).

    I mentioned Rote AT because it is a point you (and others) have frequently brought up in the past.

    Brent would probably be the one case of a pilot who left primarily for AT purposes, I don't know for certain.

    EDIT: Happy to hear that you have since moved on to a place that fits you better.

    FWIW the abusive culture has been dropped.

  20. #100
    Ruri's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Exclamation, USA
    Posts
    1,955
    Quote Originally Posted by Proxay View Post
    FWIW the abusive culture has been dropped.
    Shut your dingo-fellator jizzcunt.

    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot
    Do you even lift? Do you even post.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    Ass ass ass.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •