These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Alliance Tournament X Rules

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cap Tyrian
Guiding Hand Social Club
#61 - 2012-05-02 22:14:38 UTC
Arrow Alliance Tournament referees can now call a match null and void or declare a result if they feel a team is not competing or throwing a game. This will be entirely at the discretion of the tournament referees.


Can you pleas clarify in what situations that kicks in.
For example would this Dystopia vs Panda fight be legitimate or at risk of getting called

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_UbUSPVaaQ

ZenithDK
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#62 - 2012-05-02 22:32:36 UTC
So basically we will see no more of the "give us one biiiiillion dollars and you can have the match" since the referees will most likely void the match?

How will Goons now get into the semifinals? Twisted
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#63 - 2012-05-02 22:47:37 UTC
NOCTIS

Skillwize and marketplace, this does count as a t1 industrial category I am guessing?

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
Cap Tyrian
Guiding Hand Social Club
#64 - 2012-05-02 22:56:37 UTC
Markus Reese wrote:
NOCTIS

Skillwize and marketplace, this does count as a t1 industrial category I am guessing?


It's a T1 industrial, you can feeld it if you stop rubbing it in CCP Guard's face and making him reconsider.Smile
Lili Lu
#65 - 2012-05-03 00:05:31 UTC
Welp, I guess there will be no tiericide for BCs at least by June 30. Straight

Anyway, I eagerly await more drake tengu and ecm centered gangs . . again. I'm absolutley thrilled. Can you see it?
Gevlin
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#66 - 2012-05-03 01:10:26 UTC
on the humourous side:

I hope there is the a "Faction" based tournament, which means all team must fly ships of 1 faction.....

if that is the case I am coming with the ORE faction - I will loose hands down but man It will real awsome...


The orca - is that counted as a T1 Industrial? Can it carry replacement ships in it, if so do they count for points as well..
Would be funny where each team has a manditory 1 orca- and if it is destroyed the points would count as if all the ships were lost in that battle. Though on the other hand if the Orca which had to start at the edge of the board made it to a marker on the edge of the opponents arena then the ocra would count as not ship destroyed even though they may have been wiped out. No Micro Warpdrives permitted on the orca. The orca could carry replacement ships in if if desired, and refitting during battle would also be allowed.

Just a fun thought

Someday I will have the time to play. For now it is mining afk in High sec. In Cheap ships
brinelan
#67 - 2012-05-03 02:48:24 UTC
Quote:
Flagship ship types must be created in advance and their ship hull and name submitted to CCP Alliance Tournament via Evemail no later than 01/06/2012. The fittings for a Flagship do not have to be disclosed. Fittings may also be changed from match to match.


1/6/2012, is that a typo?
Gevlin
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#68 - 2012-05-03 02:59:05 UTC
DD/MM/YYYY

Someday I will have the time to play. For now it is mining afk in High sec. In Cheap ships
Faffywaffy
Fremen Sietch
Evasive Maneuvering.
#69 - 2012-05-03 03:25:53 UTC
Overall, good rule updates. Should bring out some new formats without completely wreaking havoc on old theorycrafting ideas.

One thing I don't like is the reduction to 10 minutes of fighting in the 12vs12 matches. Quite a few matches in previous tournaments ended up taking longer than 10 minutes and were by no means decided at the 10-minute mark. If the rule stands as-as, I guarantee people (very) upset that they didn't get to play out to the end and see "who really won". I would much rather see who wins in a Rupture vs. Machariel (in low armor) fight than have it decided by the clock.
Baneken
Arctic Light Inc.
Arctic Light
#70 - 2012-05-03 05:44:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Baneken
spookydonut wrote:
So orcas and rorquals are t1 industrial ships, can a team field those ships?


Orca is an industrial command ship and rorqual is a capital industrial ship, so no and never. Blink
Jane Algaert
Gone On A Trip
#71 - 2012-05-03 08:23:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Jane Algaert
nvm
Fr0stle
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#72 - 2012-05-03 09:28:07 UTC
Cap Tyrian wrote:
Arrow Alliance Tournament referees can now call a match null and void or declare a result if they feel a team is not competing or throwing a game. This will be entirely at the discretion of the tournament referees.


Can you pleas clarify in what situations that kicks in.
For example would this Dystopia vs Panda fight be legitimate or at risk of getting called

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_UbUSPVaaQ


Clarification of this is certainly needed. As it stands the rules are very arbitrary and essentially saying "if we don't like what you do we will remove you from the AT, but we won't tell you what we do and do not like".

There are valid situations where not competing would be the 'best' option for a team. If not competing because you are already certain to proceed and finishing second would mean a more desirable spot in the next bracket then now what is a team supposed to do?

Secondly, not guaranteeing the top four from last year a spot in the tourney seems a bit excessive don't you think? I'm all in favor of having every team go through qualifiers, but telling teams that have consistently ended in the top of the tourney that they now risk not being able to compete seems wrong.
Jowen Datloran
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#73 - 2012-05-03 09:41:57 UTC
I like these changes of rules as they attempt to minimize the meta-gaming that has started to spread within the tournament.

As we all know; like weed, meta-gaming spreads. It would be a pity to see the tournament get too infected by that crap, eventually turning it in to some kind of farce where the "winner" is whatever guy who bought his way there.

Mr. Science & Trade Institute, EVE Online Lorebook 

Antihrist Pripravnik
Cultural Enrichment and Synergy of Diversity
Stain Neurodiverse Democracy
#74 - 2012-05-03 10:05:45 UTC
Fr0stle wrote:
There are valid situations where not competing would be the 'best' option for a team. If not competing because you are already certain to proceed and finishing second would mean a more desirable spot in the next bracket then now what is a team supposed to do?


Field a mix of T1 cruisers and frigates and burn them to the max. It's not a guaranteed loss, but it's close enough and could be entertaining.

Fr0stle wrote:
Secondly, not guaranteeing the top four from last year a spot in the tourney seems a bit excessive don't you think? I'm all in favor of having every team go through qualifiers, but telling teams that have consistently ended in the top of the tourney that they now risk not being able to compete seems wrong.


If it was up to me, the top 2 teams from the last year should be disqualified at the start this year. That disgrace of a final match is the reason why there are rules against it this year in the first place.
CCP Loxy
C C P
C C P Alliance
#75 - 2012-05-03 10:17:24 UTC
Raivi wrote:
CCP Loxy wrote:
Dracoth Simertet wrote:
Mangala Solaris wrote:
Mangala Solaris wrote:
Quote:
We will be actively removing those alliances that try and add a ‘B’ or ‘C’ team. We want everyone to have a fair chance but stacking the deck in this manner will not be permitted. This removal will also include the main alliance if we detect anyone trying to field more than one team.


How will this affect RvB?

As both sides of our little community plan on entering a team this year.


Loxy.

RvB would really appreciate an answer on this. Will the B & C team thing affect us or are we golden to enter both sides of our community?



Loxy

Since your ignoring this I'll also ask, are we fine as we are entering both the Red Federation and the Blue Republic or do we need to create a new single RvB alliance?

o7
Drac


I wasn't ignoring it, I'd raised it with the rest of the team and was waiting for a consensus (as well as heading home for the night and grabbing food).

We recognise the particular situation of RvB and we will accept entries by both these alliances as normal. As this could be seen as an exception to the b&c team rule we'd like to reiterate the new position on matches:


  • For Alliance Tournament X the referees can call a match null and void or declare a result if they believe that one of the teams is not competing. This tournament is designed to showcase the talents of pilots and should be entertaining.




Would other teams with similar specific concerns be able to contact you via some official channel to discuss it?


Yes you can contact us at evetv@ccpgames.com if anyone would like to discuss an alliance entry ahead of time.

Video Producer & Director of EVE TV
CCP Loxy
C C P
C C P Alliance
#76 - 2012-05-03 10:23:23 UTC
Leeloo Malaquin wrote:
CCP Loxy wrote:
In the past we have invited the top teams from the previous tournament directly, bypassing the qualifying stage to guarantee we have some of the best and most respected teams fighting in the final weekend. We have made the specific decision this year not to do this. All teams must go through the same process.


Not getting a direct pass over quali sounds fair and all, but does top 4 get spot in the qualis at least, or do you intend to put Darkside, Razor, Outbreak and HYDRA into the hat with the chance of having best teams out of the entire tournament, with the winners unable to defend their championship?

I realize there is the auction also, but it is only limited places and who ends up getting the ticket that way is uncertain, especially if you add 4 more teams to the race for the tickets.

Anyway, looking foward to AT10, hopefully we get the chance to defend our gold.


Everyone goes into the hat & the much larger auction system which we will post the details of in the next few days. There's never a perfect solution for this but we believe we have the best chance of getting in all the major teams and those that really want a place.

Video Producer & Director of EVE TV
Antihrist Pripravnik
Cultural Enrichment and Synergy of Diversity
Stain Neurodiverse Democracy
#77 - 2012-05-03 11:02:54 UTC
General feedback for the devblog:


  1. Tournament rules:

    • The only change I can see here is the 'B' team rule which is much needed after the last year. I only hope that CCP will find a correct way to detect 'B' teams.

  2. Match rules:

    • Since you can now field 12 ships and the match is still 10 minutes long, there will be much more DPS on the field. My bet is on Tier 3 BC fleets all over the tournament.

  3. Penalties:

    • I generally don't like referees even in football matches. Even if the referee is unbiased, there will be decisions that will be flamed all over the forum. Don't forget player created propaganda, alliance wide flaming and trolling as well as rage over certain decisions. Large alliances will be much more vocal and influential than smaller ones which brings small alliances in an unfair position of being ignored if the referee acted against it (or didn't act against their opponents when needed). Good luck with the referees, but please consider my advice that they should be used almost exclusively for acting against obvious cases of rule breaking. They should keep out of the actual matches as much as possible.

  4. Place & Tactics:

    • One would think that after 9 organized tournaments there would be some development effort to make the actual arena with invisible walls and an arena wide bubble that prevents warp once the match starts. I really hoped that the 10th alliance tournament would have this (it's a milestone after all).

  5. Ships & Points:

    • Destroyers and Interdictors have the same value?
    • Having Tier 3 battlecruisers cost less than Tier 2, it will make teams use the Tier 3 setup more. Since it's a high DPS/speed platform it could go both ways in a fight against battleship heavy fleet or even Minmatar rush team. Either way, good choice.

  6. Fitting restrictions:

    • I'm not sure if Augmented drones are a good idea. Their availability on the market is questionable.



Overall, I'm happy with the rules and hope that they will bring a real tournament this year, instead of what we had last year.
Ciar Meara
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#78 - 2012-05-03 11:07:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Ciar Meara
Quote:
Alliance Tournament referees can now call a match null and void or declare a result if they feel a team is not competing or throwing a game. This will be entirely at the discretion of the tournament referees.


Good, Good...


CCP Loxy wrote:
Dinta Zembo wrote:
Will we have live streams for the qualifiers this time?


Yes, as a result of last year's experiment and the reaction from the players we identified this as a must have. We will be streaming the qualifiers but it will be low key and simple, at this point we're not sure if there will even be commentary (thoughts?).


Nice, I'd love to see it, commentary would be nice but very basic commentary with not to much "funny interludes" would be fine. Just a little summup of the teams and their ships and what not. But if that is to much of a big deal that could be given in text format I guess.

The ten minutes thing at first struck me as a pitty. But then again most matches where concluded in 10 minutes anyway in one way or another. It would be a pitty though if there was a sluggout that would be cut short. I think some kind of overtime would be nice.

- [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow]
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#79 - 2012-05-03 12:20:32 UTC
I am looking forward to maybe having more ships pr team, however up to 4 of each ship seems a recipe to monotomy...
People will just take the ships that work and take as many of them blobbing/blapping the enemy instead of configuring their team for teamwork...

Pinky
GiantSquid
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#80 - 2012-05-03 13:06:08 UTC  |  Edited by: GiantSquid
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:
Fr0stle wrote:
There are valid situations where not competing would be the 'best' option for a team. If not competing because you are already certain to proceed and finishing second would mean a more desirable spot in the next bracket then now what is a team supposed to do?



If it was up to me, the top 2 teams from the last year should be disqualified at the start this year. That disgrace of a final match is the reason why there are rules against it this year in the first place.



Well the reason that happend in the final in the first place is even though members of those top 2 allainces had requested some kind of block to this tactic in the years past CCP did nothing, it was only because it happend in a final that so much was focused on it, if you're going to ban the two winning teams then you also need to ban all the large fail alliances (with far more resourses) who did this in the same year and years before , which would leave you very little of the old names left.

Now CCP will take revenge for thier own lack of control at the start....fortunatly for them It was not Goonswarm or PL / big allaince doing this in the final, its easier for them to squash the small player groups.

On the plus side I am glad they are chainging this rule, its just a shame that GM nova did not eat his mouse mat, I hear punishment for this is a few months away from being resolved.