hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 1 of 6 1234 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 112

Thread: AT XIII in retrospect: rules, refinements, and thoughts on future tournaments

  1. #1

    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    [TSKRS]
    Posts
    3,233

    AT XIII in retrospect: rules, refinements, and thoughts on future tournaments

    Well, it's over. Congratulations to Warlords for the win; Camel, PL, and Exodus for making the final day; and CCP for producing the most smoothly run tournament I can remember. This is a thread for talking about what worked well and what didn't work so well in AT XIII, and how the tournament's rules and organisation could potentially be improved for next year. What follows is, obviously, just my opinion as a pilot/organiser/theorycrafter for a mid-tier team.

    The Rules
    On the whole, the changes to the rules this year did an excellent job of shaking up the meta. The restrictions on drones were punishing, but they at least forced people to fly things other than Ishtars/VNIs/Domis/Gilas/Rattlesnakes all the time. I just wish it had been possible to strike a balance that would allow non-drone ships with large drone bays such as the Claymore or Damnation to retain their damage potential while preventing dedicated drone ships from becoming oppressive.

    The banning of ewar scripts was also a very good move for damps, since it made them powerful and useful when applied with care but not so strong that the team with damping superiority basically won the match in the opening seconds. It seemed a little harsh on TDs, though, especially given the missile-heavy meta. ECM was in a very good place balance-wise: powerful enough to be worth bringing but certainly counterable or manageable with good fitting and tactics. Information Warfare Link - Sensor Integrity II, warfare link of my heart.

    The points costs for most ship classes were pretty well chosen for the most part, but were a bit hard on T1 battleships and cruiser hulls in general. T1 battleships at 16 points look very expensive with faction battleships costing only a point more, and that one point gap looks very small indeed when you compare it to the three point gap between T1 and faction cruisers. It would've been interesting if T1 BS had been costed at 15 or maybe even 14 points. Similarly, T1 cruisers at six points weren't generally competitive with T3Ds at the same cost; it'd have been nice if they'd been dropped to five or maybe even four. I'm sort of in two minds about HACs and pirate faction cruisers: the orthrus and cerberus felt fairly valued at 11 and 12 points, respectively, but most of the rest did not. Recons were also probably a bit too expensive - we had a couple of Curse comps, but it was very hard to justify spending 13 points on a Rapier or Huginn, for example.

    AT Ships
    I guess this is where things get contentious. The general idea behind the points system seems to be that more powerful ship classes cost more than less powerful ones, and that is generally true. However, this principle breaks down completely with AT prize ships: they are (for the most part) substantially more powerful than their T2 counterparts, but cost exactly the same number of points. A Basilisk is a much more powerful logistics ship than an Osprey and therefore costs 3 more points; an Etana is a much more powerful logistics ship than a Basilisk, but costs zero more points. I don't want them shut out from the tournament - the first match between PL and Camel was a tremendously impressive spectacle - but I do think that having AT ships cost three or four points more than the corresponding T2 ship type would be appropriate.

    Technical aspects and tournament organisation
    The first thing to say here is that CCP did a great job of keeping things running smoothly and on schedule. Huge props to their tournament team. Unfortunately, viewership for the tournament was down on previous years (IIRC it topped out at ~8.5k during the finals), and I can't help but feel that that was at least partly because so many teams that wanted to participate were shut out, including teams from some of the largest alliances in the game. I assume that at least a few more goons would've tuned in to watch their team if they'd been able to compete, for example. It'd be nice if there was some kind of single elimination pre-qualifying tournament for non-seeded teams, with an unlimited number of entrants. However it's done, I think it's important to get as many groups (particularly big groups) involved in the tournament as possible. Losing alliances the size of FCON, Goonswarm Federation, Get Off My Lawn, DARKNESS, Solar Fleet, the Initiative, and RvB before the tournament has even begun cannot possibly be a good thing.

    Another thing I would like to see would be for the PLEX prizes to be handed out as they're won. Certainly for smaller/poorer teams (like my band of terrible scrubs), it would be tremendously helpful to receive instant cash injections on reaching the top 32/16. I can understand why there has to be a delay in handing out prize ships and skins, but it seems that it should be pretty straightforward to give out PLEX.

    Spying, intel gathering, and CREST
    As part of a team that ran all its practices in SiSi-Syndicate and didn't make any organised efforts to spy on other teams, I'm probably oblivious to much of the spying that went on, and our own anti-spying efforts were pretty much non-existent. However, the introduction of the practice units was very welcome; if in future they could be made to automatically spawn appropriately positioned MJD beacons, that'd be really nice. The CREST API is another matter altogether; we didn't use it much last year, but this year our logi pilot Latronicus (tournament MVP!) wrote a CREST parser and... uh, wow. Too much information, CCP! Essentially, the CREST data is so detailed that you can piece together the fit of just about any ship fielded by any team in the tournament, even if it never dies; you have to assume that once you have fielded a setup, all of the other good teams in the tournament will know exactly how every ship was fit. It's nice, and presumably the detail is what enables the guys at null-sec.com to produce their fantastic match replays, but I wish the data were only released after the tournament had concluded or not at all.
    Last edited by Tafkat; August 31 2015 at 08:54:21 AM.

  2. #2
    W0lf Crendraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 26, 2012
    Location
    The United
    Posts
    8,970
    First off, agree with the op bar the td part (unbonused ones are to strong if scripted). Then:

    Flagships need to go as such, a flagship shouldnt be bs only and exist only as a ban evading mechanic. I.e you make a oneiros your flagship, you then can bring an oneiros through bans till its destroyed, once it is you cannot field it again (not sure about that tbh, simple beeing allowed to select 1 unbannable ship which you can bring again even if it gets destroyed might be better). Note that that can only happen if at ships (and tinkers) get adjusted or banned. Reason is isk, a flaghip worth a titan or so is simply not really doable for many teams. It also doesnt add all that much to the game.

    All non fitting implants need to go away, having 12 people plug out 100mil in implants per match for tiny adjustments is to much and it is mandetory because everyone does it. Fitting implants ought to stay 3%. All higher then faction ammo needs to go, again it gives isk an advantage which is bad. Rare faction ammo and 3%s beeing gone should really matter for anyone as everyone does it. It however is a slight buff to logis so maybe not.

    I would higher the plex payout significantly and make it obtainable much sooner, because as the tough kitty said, it gives poor teams the means to continue the at by winning the at, which imo is a great idea.


    Tinkers are boring aidsfests. Pseudo tinkers less so but still, allowing up to 2 transfers in any comp as the maximum imo would do the trick - bans tinkers but allows pseudo tinkers in a weakened state (bar the etana, but fuck the etana).




    This is all stuff imo that needs to happen to level the playing field and allow people to actively perform in the AT, hydra or camel will probably win still but it wont be on the back of at ships eating bans or getting fielded en masse.


    Now for personal stuff, i would like to see but im not sure is realistic.


    Tournaments happens on sisi or a special tournament server with all V characters for everyone, ships are seeded and no isk is involved at all. At ships seeded for everyone at higher point costs, winning thus gives you absurd isk on tq but no advantage at all in the tournament.


    A totally different bracket system, i would like the at to be the same system as the worldcup or the champions league (basicely a mix of both), qualifiers all over the year (for lower teams) which already pay out quite well, this allows people to practice, doesnt have to be on stream but could be run by players like bei (and streamed by them). Actual tournament starts in a group format with best of 2s, where the top 2 teams move on, then its single elimination in best of 3s till a best of 5 for the semis and a best of 7 for the grand final. This was sort of tried before but only sort of. Keep at stuff running year round, its a fun way to pass the time and the top 16 or so are seeded by default. Beeing in the actual tournament should pay you out big time already and should be the goal for all at teams, no matter how small they are, similarily to how just getting into the champions league was/is (depends if you play in england, then you get money out the ass anyways) a huge win for non top tier teams.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    I see you have read nietzsche's little known work "beyond boobs and butts".

  3. #3

    Join Date
    September 7, 2014
    Posts
    57
    Regarding rules, i think damp nerf was a little bit too harsh, i think limiting modules to t1 would make them weaker, but not almost utterly useless (with current ruleset 1 range scripted RSB on damp target and your damp ship does nothing starting from 20th second of the fight).
    Battleships were OK imo, if you assume that class should have cost of the most powerful ship within it. I think typhoon isn't much weaker than TFI at all (at least cruise, i don't get that RHML obsession 90% of teams had). The rest of them are kind of meh, but that's what you get for per-class point costs.
    I still didn't like that turtles were a thing, would limit energy transfers to logies only.

    Uniques:
    - Malice, unique with best survival rate this AT. I think people watch matches and overestimate its importance. It is still easily killable even through reps, e.g. if it commits brainlessly into enemy ships which didn't split too much, and it has to commit to do its job. It has notably weak sensors, thus it gets almost permadisabled with jamms or ecm drones (although our fit with ECCM fixes it to some extent, I wonder if PL came up with the same on their own or just took it from us). It is much weaker than curse for battlefield control (had a few laughs at some attempts to place it to curse power level here) - curse has 40km radius covered with neuts around it, malice has 12. Even vangel with its 25 km neuts is 2-3 times worse than a curse, because sphere of control is much smaller. Malice is just powerful single-target neuting/tackling ship. The only reason why it was so powerful this year - is that almost every setup abused energy transfers and had excessive amounts of tank. You cannot break it with dps, thus you have to bring good amount of neuting on single target. You take energy transfers out of the tourney, malice becomes... well, not useless, but not so useful at least. If you know enemy logistics has limited amount of HP, you better bring dps ships there and kill it, than neuts to keep its cap dry - because later on you might have to get away and enemy team will have logi up again. Meta dictates usefulness of certain ships, i would not do any knee-jerk reactions and make malice cost 13 pts (lol), removal of energy transfers might as well remove malices from the field.
    - Etana. It's not as OP as some may think, eg our basi in widow turtle had approximately same amount of tank as PL's etana which they lost vs shadow cartel, and only a bit less RR. PL's etana had LSE though. If you remove ETs from the meta - etana becomes sub-par compared to, say, scimi, and you will never see it fielded again. If you make it 1 or 2 points more expensive - and you will never see it again because basi does this job almost as good as etana, and you can improve your other ships.

    The rest of uniques were not even seemingly deal-breakers this year. Cambions are just cooler hawk, chremoas are fast as fuck and kill bombers at insane rate even if they are 1mn/10mn ab (too bad we failed to do it on TQ).

    Oh and forgot to say that use of uniques in your team changes the way you handle the match. Uniques almost always make you to play defensively, because you have to make sure that you not just win, but you keep uniques alive. That camel vs exodus match would go much easier if camels took vengeance and smartbombs instead of 1 heavy neut on each TFIs and just traded the logies, and then won because of much stronger support. In fact, we tested this almost-mirror matchup twice (but with us doing bbs, not kitsunes vs their t3d-heavy variation) the day before the match and got wiped both times. Malice just made camels to do screening, at which they fucked up. Thus i am inclined to think that camels would actually lose less ships if they brought venge.
    Last edited by Kadesh; August 31 2015 at 11:36:30 AM.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Pandemic Legion
    Posts
    438
    I think t2 mobile drones should return and instead just ban all sentries. You are essentially removing an entire weapon system and the ships that rely on them with t1 drones and it also means t2 rep drones are the obvious choice in every composition.

  5. #5
    Daneel Trevize's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    T L A
    Posts
    12,338
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Rare faction ammo and 3%s beeing gone should really matter for anyone as everyone does it. It however is a slight buff to logis so maybe not.
    If the dps/logi buff is a concern, technically CCP could do a conversion thing, where faction ammo is swapped for stronger stuff on move to the match systems. Yes it'll probably smash the market for such stuff, but it's probably easier for them than making AT reps & drones rep less than elsewhere on TQ.
    Or force feed everyone a booster that reduces RR strength, but again you need to remember drones too.


    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Kadesh again.


    Quote Originally Posted by Lucas Quaan View Post
    I think t2 mobile drones should return and instead just ban all sentries. You are essentially removing an entire weapon system and the ships that rely on them with t1 drones and it also means t2 rep drones are the obvious choice in every composition.
    This, and it seems so obvious a rule, was there not a reason given already as to why they didn't choose it?
    Last edited by Daneel Trevize; August 31 2015 at 11:52:13 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    Idk about that, and i'm fucking stupid.

  6. #6
    W0lf Crendraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 26, 2012
    Location
    The United
    Posts
    8,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Daneel Trevize View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Rare faction ammo and 3%s beeing gone should really matter for anyone as everyone does it. It however is a slight buff to logis so maybe not.
    If the dps/logi buff is a concern, technically CCP could do a conversion thing, where faction ammo is swapped for stronger stuff on move to the match systems. Yes it'll probably smash the market for such stuff, but it's probably easier for them than making AT reps & drones rep less than elsewhere on TQ.
    Or force feed everyone a booster that reduces RR strength, but again you need to remember drones too.


    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Kadesh again.


    Quote Originally Posted by Lucas Quaan View Post
    I think t2 mobile drones should return and instead just ban all sentries. You are essentially removing an entire weapon system and the ships that rely on them with t1 drones and it also means t2 rep drones are the obvious choice in every composition.
    This, and it seems so obvious a rule, was there not a reason given already as to why they didn't choose it?
    Cause sentrys were way weaker then real drones iirc, geckos and augmented medium or large drones were the thing to be afraid of. I mean vni was 9 points, orthrus was 11, orthrus deals less damage at range even if you dont factor reload in while beeing significantly less tanky. Also the whiptail and chameleon would have been absurdly op due to how important jamming drones is in a guristas meta (which you can force by bans). Lastly this at was way more skill intensive then the last 2, due to drones beeing assign,, go afk comps with very little screening or actual piloting beeing required.

    @kadesh, morocha actually was fairly important too as the 2 rapiers/huginns would have killed the comp probably due to way lower overall dps and alpha, and i disagree on the etana, scimi is the better kiting logi but vs a team that goes for the logi the etana simply tanks so much more and has so much more ehp.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    I see you have read nietzsche's little known work "beyond boobs and butts".

  7. #7
    Suleiman Shouaa's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    [TSKRS]
    Posts
    864
    I think banning sentries (at least t2) would be a nice solution. You could possibly ban Augmented drones as well just to be on the safe side, as there's no real equivalent for other weapon systems (better damage, better range, better tracking, better "range" via speed etc.). Also, TDs should be able to run with scripts as even though they are very powerful, they aren't effective against every team, unlike other ewar so it's a bit of a gamble bringing them.

    Some random thoughts on point changes (only left in the ones I think should change):

    Marauder - 18 (were barely used, they have some very niche advantages over their Pirate equivalents but some huge glaring weakneses)
    Battleship - 16
    Strategic Cruiser - 15 - Apart from tinker configurations, no-one actually ran T3 Cruisers since CS are generally much better than them in terms of the amount of links you can fit / DPS / Tank / Sensor Strength.
    Recon Ship - 12 - Really hard to justify running a Recon when you can either go for a Tech1 Cruiser / EAF who performs almost as well in some cases (Rook vs BB / Kitsune) or just a BS (for ECM anyway). Lachesis and Huginn have the same issues, Curse to a lesser degree.
    Battlecruiser, Navy Faction – 11 - Hard to say as they were supposed to be buffed, but in their current version they're not generally worth as much as a HAC beyond a niche hull tanked BNI.
    Heavy Assault Cruiser - 11 - Cerberus is probably the best HAC for the tournament, but really hard to justify it costing more than an Orthrus as it does have some advantages but also some disadvantages.
    Battlecruiser (including the Gnosis) - 10 - Same as Navy BCs.
    Heavy Interdictor - 10 - Whilst HICs are a hell of a lot more competitive than they were in the past, I still don't think they compare favourably to Pirate Cruisers as they are not as tanky in the AT as they are in regular PvP as you have to give up mids for ECCM / Tackle / Cap Booster.
    Tech 1 Support Cruiser - 8 - 10 points is way too much, there's a reason no-one's primary choice of logi for their comps used them.
    Ewar Cruiser - 6 (break them into their own group, like Tech1 Cruiser Logi)
    Cruiser - 5 - Apart from the ewar cruisers, these were almost non-existent apart from our use of the Moas and there's a reason for that. I think the Tech1 drone rule really hurt them as that was one of their biggest advantages compared to AFs / T3Ds.
    Frigate, Pirate Faction - 3 - Still not sure why you would never bring one instead of an AF / Dictor if they cost the same amount of points. Cruor is cute but it still dies like a Tech1 Frigate.
    Covert Ops Ship - 3 - Pretty self explanatory.
    Destroyer - 2 - A bit controversial I guess, but they were never used apart from by Exodus iirc as even a Tech1 Frigate that offers 3/4 utility mids is much more useful compared to a Dessie that dies instantly if it brawls or if there are missiles on grid. Oh and it currently costs 1 point less.

    On the Uniques you mentioned Kadesh, I generally agree. The Malice's strength is that it's a frigate and inherently much harder to hit than a Curse and can also re-position itself much easier than a Curse. It shouldn't cost 13 points, but I think 6 is pretty reasonable to make it an alternative to a T3D / Cruiser. It's particularly powerful against circle jerks but even against a comp with links or logi (which is at least 90% of them) it can pretty much shut down either links or shut down remote reps whilst being almost unkillable as long as it's logi is not out of position or jammed, which means it either reduces the tank of the entire enemy team by up to ~40% (if it's on the link ship) or their remote tank by about 80% if it's on the logi. Oh and it costs the same as a Vengeance and is very hard to screen and even if it is screened, it can still neut out its own screener in most cases.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    September 7, 2014
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    @kadesh, morocha actually was fairly important too as the 2 rapiers/huginns would have killed the comp probably due to way lower overall dps and alpha, and i disagree on the etana, scimi is the better kiting logi but vs a team that goes for the logi the etana simply tanks so much more and has so much more ehp.
    You can disagree if you buy one, field it youself and see how it performs. We did it in at 11 and it wasn't worth 80-100 bil at all. If caught off-guard - it lives 2 seconds longer than scimi. Vs projected damage scimi actually lives longer due to better sig and speed.

    Moracha setup is cool gimmick, but if you look at other alternatives (cynabal, broadsword, but lol not huginn) they are not terrible arty ships - slower/less survivable, but cheaper point- and isk-wise. We were banning it just because half of our setup pool wasn't ready to deal with high med gun volley and we didn't want to take additional risks related to this fact.

  9. #9
    Daneel Trevize's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    T L A
    Posts
    12,338
    What are your experienced people's thoughts on permitting a team to field 1 RR module per ship if none are on bonused-RR hulls?
    Does it realistically only open up LARR Sac & BCs/BSs/CSs?

    Perhaps instead state it as a limit of 6 RR modules total in any team setup??
    2x3 LARR Domi too stronk (with LAARs too)?

    And in general just how much of the points discussion is skewed by a few poorly balanced things like the Orthrus, or Bastion mode?
    Last edited by Daneel Trevize; August 31 2015 at 12:29:50 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    Idk about that, and i'm fucking stupid.

  10. #10
    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
    @kadesh, morocha actually was fairly important too as the 2 rapiers/huginns would have killed the comp probably due to way lower overall dps and alpha, and i disagree on the etana, scimi is the better kiting logi but vs a team that goes for the logi the etana simply tanks so much more and has so much more ehp.
    You can disagree if you buy one, field it youself and see how it performs. We did it in at 11 and it wasn't worth 80-100 bil at all. If caught off-guard - it lives 2 seconds longer than scimi. Vs projected damage scimi actually lives longer due to better sig and speed.

    Moracha setup is cool gimmick, but if you look at other alternatives (cynabal, broadsword, but lol not huginn) they are not terrible arty ships - slower/less survivable, but cheaper point- and isk-wise. We were banning it just because half of our setup pool wasn't ready to deal with high med gun volley and we didn't want to take additional risks related to this fact.
    I think its more about how its a rapier which allows you to track everything and a arty cynabal at once, which imo only allows the comp to work. You throw 3 webs or so on the kill target (in total), dont even bother with transversal matching and everything dies instantly.
    Last edited by W0lf Crendraven; August 31 2015 at 12:39:05 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    I see you have read nietzsche's little known work "beyond boobs and butts".

  11. #11

    Join Date
    September 7, 2014
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kadesh View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    @kadesh, morocha actually was fairly important too as the 2 rapiers/huginns would have killed the comp probably due to way lower overall dps and alpha, and i disagree on the etana, scimi is the better kiting logi but vs a team that goes for the logi the etana simply tanks so much more and has so much more ehp.
    You can disagree if you buy one, field it youself and see how it performs. We did it in at 11 and it wasn't worth 80-100 bil at all. If caught off-guard - it lives 2 seconds longer than scimi. Vs projected damage scimi actually lives longer due to better sig and speed.

    Moracha setup is cool gimmick, but if you look at other alternatives (cynabal, broadsword, but lol not huginn) they are not terrible arty ships - slower/less survivable, but cheaper point- and isk-wise. We were banning it just because half of our setup pool wasn't ready to deal with high med gun volley and we didn't want to take additional risks related to this fact.
    I think its more about how its a rapier which allows you to track everything and a arty cynabal at once, which imo only allows the comp to work. You throw 3 webs or so on the kill target, dont even bother with transversal matching and everything dies instantly.
    Vigil (and even unbonused TPs) achieves that without need to bring uniques (even vs sig-bonused hulls like AFs). Ceptors still might be hard to hit, but they can be dealt with by other means (defensive tackle, jamms). Primary role of webs from morachas is to help sleipnirs to not get tackled, as i see it.

    I'm sorry but you cannot convince me that moracha is OP. That setup would lose vs almost any undermanned turtle really badly (or, at least, wouldn't win vs it). It makes setup better, yeah, but it comes at a high price AND at the risk of losing everything if you face inconvenient setup. Ganglinked and ship-bonused TD spam, which is possible in armor setups with sentinel/curse, or some loki-based turtle, and you're 200 bil+ down with good chance.

    I think you're viewing at the unique 'problem' from just one side, evaluating ship power-per-point. But you completely forget that other side - which has uniques - is going to take more considerations when they decide, should they field uniques or not. Namely, ISK price and risks of losing them (which heavily depend on setup and meta overall).
    Last edited by Kadesh; August 31 2015 at 12:50:16 PM.

  12. #12
    Suleiman Shouaa's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    [TSKRS]
    Posts
    864
    Quote Originally Posted by Daneel Trevize View Post
    What are your experienced people's thoughts on permitting a team to field 1 RR module per ship if none are on bonused-RR hulls?
    Does it realistically only open up LARR Sac & BCs/BSs/CSs?

    Perhaps instead state it as a limit of 6 RR modules total in any team setup??
    2x3 LARR Domi too stronk (with LAARs too)?

    And in general just how much of the points discussion is skewed by a few poorly balanced things like the Orthrus, or Bastion mode?
    Well considering T2 Logi doesn't get a bonus to rep amount (just to range & cap), you can imagine how much tank you could get from doing so. With the mobility limitations being similar to a tinker, you would get a slightly stronger RR tank than you would get from a max rep logistics (5 T2 Large Reps onto primary compared to 4 T2 you get from an Oneiros / Guardian), but without spending 16 points on a ship that does 0 DPS. Seems interesting, particularly if cap transfers aren't allowed as then the reps become pretty volatile to neuts/jams/damps and you have to have 6 guys who can move reps around whilst still doing DPS, tackling etc.

    For shield I think it would be weaker than a tinker actually, as Tengu / Loki can already fit (albeit a limited number of) Large RR and you have less mids for cap boosters / tank / anti-ewar.

    I'm really not sure how CCP balances ships, as they've kept ships at the same points cost for years on end despite them never being popular and with no recent rebalancing (Tech1 Logi Cruisers for example). In terms of the discussion here, I guess probably alot - for most ship classes there are big differences in strength amongst the class. For example, almost no-one fielded an Absolution, but almost every other CS was popular (Astarte less so, but PL did run some in the finals) so I can't see people calling for CS to cost less as the Absolution is never fielded.

  13. #13
    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
    Quote Originally Posted by Kadesh View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    @kadesh, morocha actually was fairly important too as the 2 rapiers/huginns would have killed the comp probably due to way lower overall dps and alpha, and i disagree on the etana, scimi is the better kiting logi but vs a team that goes for the logi the etana simply tanks so much more and has so much more ehp.
    You can disagree if you buy one, field it youself and see how it performs. We did it in at 11 and it wasn't worth 80-100 bil at all. If caught off-guard - it lives 2 seconds longer than scimi. Vs projected damage scimi actually lives longer due to better sig and speed.

    Moracha setup is cool gimmick, but if you look at other alternatives (cynabal, broadsword, but lol not huginn) they are not terrible arty ships - slower/less survivable, but cheaper point- and isk-wise. We were banning it just because half of our setup pool wasn't ready to deal with high med gun volley and we didn't want to take additional risks related to this fact.
    I think its more about how its a rapier which allows you to track everything and a arty cynabal at once, which imo only allows the comp to work. You throw 3 webs or so on the kill target, dont even bother with transversal matching and everything dies instantly.
    Vigil (and even unbonused TPs) achieves that without need to bring uniques (even vs sig-bonused hulls like AFs). Ceptors still might be hard to hit, but they can be dealt with by other means (defensive tackle, jamms). Primary role of webs from morachas is to help sleipnirs to not get tackled, as i see it.

    I'm sorry but you cannot convince me that moracha is OP. That setup would lose vs almost any undermanned turtle really badly (or, at least, wouldn't win vs it). It makes setup better, yeah, but it comes at a high price AND at the risk of losing everything if you face inconvenient setup. Ganglinked and ship-bonused TD spam, which is possible in armor setups with sentinel/curse, or some loki-based turtle, and you're 200 bil+ down with good chance.

    I think you're viewing at the unique 'problem' from just one side, evaluating ship power-per-point. But you completely forget that other side - which has uniques - is going to take more considerations when they decide, should they field uniques or not. Namely, ISK price and risks of losing them (which heavily depend on setup and meta overall).
    Well, i agree that morachas arent op, i looked at them and went "meh". But in that comp, vs a support based comp, imo they fullfill the recons and the damage dealers role at once which i think is crucial and only really makes the comp pop. And i, tbh, dont care about how much isk they cost when thinking about them strat wise (i do if i consider who can actually use them), ideally the whole thing should be free of isk anyways and then there just is a gross point imbalance of at ships in the current rule set. And, at least for me that is what counts. Obviously it sucks that they cant be used on tq due to how eve works but them, in terms of bans and on field power, creating a imblance in the at is even worse imo. Just consider the bans from the other side, you for example banned armour logi a few times forcing some teams into shield - if they had then decided that they dont want you to do that they could have simply banned shield logi, creating a very interesting situation of no good logi beeing avaible, thus creating a very different meta (forcing logi frigs, t1 logi, a all in comp, a tinker) - but they cant due to how the etana, even if it was shit, still is a valid shield logi. That hurts a teams ability to meta quite a lot especially since you obviously made extensive use of that, seeing as most of your top tier comps bar the ever good tfi were shield based (although i cant say if was due to having 3 logis or if that was just a plus point to you beeing shield heavy).


    I think the thing is that you (as in hydra) or camel or even pl can almost reliably make it to the top 4, losing anything up to 6 at ship thus nets you a profit, of sorts. Anyone else, without the pedigree and the experience would get better but its not nearly as certain so they are way more risky to field. And the more at ships you get the less it hurts to lose a few.




    I still think the best way is a total ban of at ships for the at but in exchange make them totally and utterly insanely op (scram immunity, any warp disruption immunity, 350km lock range with 300% range bonused artys, etc) so that you can do a ton with them on tq and only ever dying really reaally rarely (massed alpha or so). They shoul retain their value and some of the stupid stuff from the at gets removed.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    I see you have read nietzsche's little known work "beyond boobs and butts".

  14. #14
    Daneel Trevize's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    T L A
    Posts
    12,338
    How about CCP do something for the Mimir first?
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    Idk about that, and i'm fucking stupid.

  15. #15

    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    [TSKRS]
    Posts
    3,233
    I'm not sure why people are so down on tinkers and other turtles in general - I think they have an important function in keeping people honest and not focusing exclusively on kitey ewar-heavy control setups (not that there's anything wrong with those either). Tinkers aren't especially hard to break if you bring a comp with reasonable neuting/dps/bumping capabilities; if you choose to bring a comp that lacks those capabilities but is really strong against other things, then the risk of losing to a surprise turtle that you couldn't ban out is just something you have to deal with.

    Also, one thing I forgot to mention in the OP was the restriction to only two ships of each type. I think that was a really good change and helped make for more diverse comps.

  16. #16

    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Pandemic Legion
    Posts
    438
    Tinkers are fine and have a role to play in the meta. The people who cry about them on the forums just need to sit down and look at how they work, what they counter and what they are countered by and they would realise this.

  17. #17

    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Pandemic Legion
    Posts
    438
    Quote Originally Posted by Suleiman Shouaa View Post
    I think banning sentries (at least t2) would be a nice solution. You could possibly ban Augmented drones as well just to be on the safe side, as there's no real equivalent for other weapon systems (better damage, better range, better tracking, better "range" via speed etc.).
    Yup, just allow regular t2 mobile drones and all will be well.

  18. #18
    Daneel Trevize's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    T L A
    Posts
    12,338
    Personally a part of the tinker hate is that it's just so far from what's viable on TQ. At least spider tanking is a thing there, cap-fed-only logi with local tank isn't at all (not even in w-space). It's so artificial, potentially powerful because of the AT setting, and boring to watch mirror matches of.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    Idk about that, and i'm fucking stupid.

  19. #19
    W0lf Crendraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 26, 2012
    Location
    The United
    Posts
    8,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Daneel Trevize View Post
    Personally a part of the tinker hate is that it's just so far from what's viable on TQ. At least spider tanking is a thing there, cap-fed-only logi with local tank isn't at all (not even in w-space). It's so artificial, potentially powerful because of the AT setting, and boring to watch mirror matches of.
    I dislike them cause they totally kill off the no logi meta, sure they do serve a role and most tinkers suck but they are boring to watch, boring to fly, boring to fight. Just all around boring, and they totally limit the control aspect of the game.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    I see you have read nietzsche's little known work "beyond boobs and butts".

  20. #20

    Join Date
    June 20, 2014
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Daneel Trevize View Post
    Personally a part of the tinker hate is that it's just so far from what's viable on TQ. At least spider tanking is a thing there, cap-fed-only logi with local tank isn't at all (not even in w-space). It's so artificial, potentially powerful because of the AT setting, and boring to watch mirror matches of.
    I dislike them cause they totally kill off the no logi meta, sure they do serve a role and most tinkers suck but they are boring to watch, boring to fly, boring to fight. Just all around boring, and they totally limit the control aspect of the game.
    you sure as shit talking out of your ass if you think flying a tinker is boring

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
  •