These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Alliance Tournament Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Alliance Tournament XII

First post
Author
CCP Gargant
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1 - 2014-04-25 15:14:40 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Gargant
The announcement blog for this summers' Alliance Tournament is up!

Check it out here:

http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/alliance-tournament-xii-announced/

If you are interested in becoming a guest commentator this year, you should be especially interested in this. You have until May 18th to send in your application.

CCP Gargant | EVE Universe esports Coordinator

Destoya
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#2 - 2014-04-25 15:20:38 UTC
The hype is real.
Joe D'Trader
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#3 - 2014-05-03 04:52:25 UTC
I guess I should start mining so I can afford a few PLEX
Drajnul
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#4 - 2014-05-03 12:24:11 UTC
This is going to be great, I'm super pumped.

I do have one concern for the AT and that is that it is becoming clear that it favors wealthy teams. If it was just one angle in which this was the case, then it wouldn't be an issue as other teams would still have a reasonable chance. However, the big teams currently just have too many advantages - namely, the following.

(I) The entrance costs are of little or no consequence to them.

We know that the cut off for the NEO's silent auction was 13 PLEX which I suppose is reasonable considering the NEO is a cash prize tournament and has less teams. However, that number is probably also bit lower than it should be as the NEO takes place in March, where people are lot less likely to have free time to compete than in summer or winter.

Assuming the cutoff is similar for ATXII, that's at least 10 billion isk just to get in and this number will rise every year as Eve grows and the number of alliances competing in the tournament stays the same.

(II) Fleet costs

Sure you can fly cheap ships, but nobody is going to get very far in the AT with tech 1 ships. Teams can and should be able to field their very best possible setup that they can come up with and have practiced, no matter the cost. Having to pour the 10+ Billion in entrance fees is a pretty big hit for average non-sov block alliances and cuts into how much they can afford to invest in ships. If they have to compromise on their setups because of cost and end up losing as a result, I think that's really bad for the tournament.

(III) Tournament Ships

Only a handful of teams can afford to field Malices, Etanas and the like. These ships are made to be explicity overpowered by the devs and basically only a handful of alliances can afford to put down the 70+ Billion to acquire just one of them.

(IV) Flagship

Lastly, very few teams can afford to put in 20-80B into the flagship. And you know the wealthier teams are going to take full advantage.

(V) Gravitation of pilots (indirectly)
We know the success of the top teams also has led to top pilots leaving their alliances and moving to those teams, which has reinforced the effect. Of course, this is perfectly normal and expected. But it is a symptom of a non-competitive system as pilots see that their only way to success is to switch teams instead of fostering a competitive team themselves in their alliance.

Overall, participation in the AT is awfully expensive if you're not a large sov block alliance or a previous winner with prize ships to fund your tournament. This wouldn't be so bad if the expected value of competing in the tournament wasn't approximately zero for 95% of teams. It's also interesting that the farther a team goes in the tournament, the more it costs to compete effectively. And so you have a rubber band effect where the farther a team goes the more they are burdened, especially when they inevitably drop down to the losers bracket.

It's not obvious what can be done about these issues. There's not much that could change about problem (II), as CCP probably wants to keep the AT on TQ for business reasons. There's not much that can be done about (III) either as we all like to see tournament ships get blown up, let's be honest Big smile. The flagship is probably not consequential enough to change either, although I personally find it a bit of a gimmicky mechanic, especially since by nature it steers teams only toward Battleship flagships. If this somehow wasn't the case, you could have more interesting gameplay if teams could viably field more unusual ships like, oh idk, Faction Web Huginns.

Perhaps the easiest way to help things be a little more equitable for smaller alliances, would be to address (I). The system used last year, whereby half of teams are randomly drawn in makes little sense as you end up getting some rather poor teams competing and likely leaving some competent (non-sov) teams out simply because they, ironically, try to spend their time in Eve doing pvp instead of grinding for isk.

If we hope to have Eve be well represented and grow as an esport, then it needs to be as competitive and fair as possible. We all know how eve the sandbox is rarely ever fair and competitive as it is a game characterized by asymmetric war. The AT is much better in this regard which is one the things that make it so great and refreshing, but it could be better still.


P.S. Thanks for reading my wall of text. And forgive me for posting from an NPC alt but these are my own opinions, and I didn't want to allow folks here to project this on my alliance who may or may not agree with this.
Faffywaffy
OEG
Bright Side of Death
#5 - 2014-05-05 13:54:52 UTC
Tournament prize ships should cost (in points) proportionately to their strength.
DF Khamez
Zer0 C0rp.
#6 - 2014-05-28 14:06:34 UTC
Quote:
All competing pilots must be members of the alliance for which they are competing, and have been a member of that alliance by 11:00 UTC April 24th 2014



so one cant join an allaiance and compete ? or that month "April " is a tiny typo there ? .. or im just missing something ?
Suitonia
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#7 - 2014-05-28 14:13:08 UTC
DF Khamez wrote:
Quote:
All competing pilots must be members of the alliance for which they are competing, and have been a member of that alliance by 11:00 UTC April 24th 2014



so one cant join an allaiance and compete ? or that month "April " is a tiny typo there ? .. or im just missing something ?


It's not a typo, the April 24th 2014 cutoff date was announced last month. The rule is in effect to try and make the Alliance Tournament more about alliances rather than a mish-mash of pilots who randomly join an alliance to compete.

Contributer to Eve is Easy:  https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos

Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o

Dantesi Cadelanne
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2014-05-28 16:18:34 UTC
"PLACE AND TACTICS:"

"The arena contains nine Mobile Micro Jump Unit structures, one placed in the center and eight placed 87km away from the center in the direction of each of the eight team beacons. These outer structures form a cube around the center of the arena with sides approximately 100km in length. These Mobile Micro Jump Units are indestructible and usable by all."


CCP Wants to watch the universe burn. This aught to be interesting.

Links to current poll related to the Dev blog: Unboxing the new Camera in EVE Online http://imgur.com/xUd2UJb (Initial Poll Data) https://twitter.com/EVE_Dantesi/status/697896708810735617 Poll Link

02/11/2016

Party Per Fess
Presidential Office of Transparency
Goonswarm Federation
#9 - 2014-05-28 17:45:16 UTC
Quote:
All Remote Armor Repair modules and Remote Shield Transfer modules are NOT allowed, EXCEPT on ONE of: a Logistics Ship, a Strategic Cruiser, a Tech 1 Support Cruiser; or on up to TWO Tech 1 Support Frigates.


Am I correct in understanding that this means a Nestor may not be used for logi? If so, what prompted the decision not to allow a ship designed for logi to use that ability?
Faffywaffy
OEG
Bright Side of Death
#10 - 2014-05-28 18:12:19 UTC
Quote:
Teams may field no more than 1 logistics ship, or 1 tech one support cruiser, or 2 support frigates in each match.


Quote:
All Remote Armor Repair modules and Remote Shield Transfer modules are NOT allowed, EXCEPT on ONE of: a Logistics Ship, a Strategic Cruiser, a Tech 1 Support Cruiser; or on up to TWO Tech 1 Support Frigates.


Either the first quote is missing the t3 in a logi configuration, or the 2nd quote should not mention it. Unless, of course, you want to allow an unlimited number of logi t3's.

You might also want to change the wording to mention that it's not just any strategic cruiser, but a strategic cruiser with the logi subsystem.
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#11 - 2014-05-28 19:50:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Quaan
Faffywaffy wrote:
Quote:
Teams may field no more than 1 logistics ship, or 1 tech one support cruiser, or 2 support frigates in each match.


Quote:
All Remote Armor Repair modules and Remote Shield Transfer modules are NOT allowed, EXCEPT on ONE of: a Logistics Ship, a Strategic Cruiser, a Tech 1 Support Cruiser; or on up to TWO Tech 1 Support Frigates.


Either the first quote is missing the t3 in a logi configuration, or the 2nd quote should not mention it. Unless, of course, you want to allow an unlimited number of logi t3's.

You might also want to change the wording to mention that it's not just any strategic cruiser, but a strategic cruiser with the logi subsystem.

The first quote is only regarding ship types.

You can field any number (well, <=3 of the same race) of t3s, but only one of them can fit remote rep. You could have, say, 3xLegion+3xProteus, all with the logi sub, but only fit reppers to one of them. However, you can not field 3xBasi+3xScimi, even if you only were to put reppers on one.
Faffywaffy
OEG
Bright Side of Death
#12 - 2014-05-28 19:53:53 UTC
I see. I guess my understanding of "one of" is not what was intended by the author.
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#13 - 2014-05-28 20:12:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Quaan
The intent is pretty clear. "One of" means just that; on one (1) of the t3s that you brought with the limit on the actual hull being the usual three-of-a-kind and no restriction on subsystems. I mean, there are situations where you would like to use the logi sub on a t3 without putting reps on it, simply because of what it offers besides that (slots, resists etc).
Faffywaffy
OEG
Bright Side of Death
#14 - 2014-05-28 21:04:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Faffywaffy
Quote:
Previous Alliance Tournament prize ships that have both T2 and Faction status fall under their T2 classes for point values.


Firstly, this is very disappointing. You go to such lengths to level the playing field (only 3% implants), balance the point costs (different costs for Domis and Ishtars) and then do this. I guess your desire to see expensive ships explode is stronger than your desire to have a fair tournament.

Secondly, I think we're going to need a clarification of that. What's meant by "T2 and Faction" status?

Does the Moracha count as a HAC or as a Recon, for example?
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#15 - 2014-05-28 22:20:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Quaan
Moracha gets a bonus from the Recon skill, so it will be considered a Recon at 14 points.

edit: This is also why you see Covert Ops at 4 points, since the Chremoas counts as one.
Drajnul
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#16 - 2014-05-28 22:21:27 UTC
Marauder points nerf seems very misplaced as they weren't even very effective in the NEO where the smaller format benefits them.

Ltd SpacePig
No.Mercy
Triumvirate.
#17 - 2014-05-30 10:42:32 UTC
How long time will the signup be open for? Is it only today?
Post Uta
Doomheim
#18 - 2014-06-07 10:27:16 UTC
BTW, only formal CEO of alliance (CEO of holder corporation) can send participation request? Or it could be anyone interesting in partisipation from this alliance?
Faffywaffy
OEG
Bright Side of Death
#19 - 2014-08-06 11:56:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Faffywaffy
Fozzie, please take a look at the petition I wrote about participation of one of the ex-DarkSide corps.
Da Winci
Circle-0f-Two
Pandemic Horde
#20 - 2014-08-18 18:39:59 UTC
Can some CCP dev shed some light on what will the line up will look like next week? Specifically the loser bracket. Specifically the upcoming CODE match?

Just curious.
12Next page