These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Get rid of Tiers

Author
Erim Solfara
House of Solfara
#21 - 2011-10-22 19:19:29 UTC
Ines Tegator wrote:
Agreed that BC's are in the worst shape. Frigates second, cruisers 3rd. BS's are mostly OK, since the bottom tier ships can still be given useful fittings and are arguably balanced by the lower cost, which at the BS price level is significant. Fixing hybrids will by default fix the BS balance that currently exist imo (Rokh, mega, hype). BC's only have one useful hull per race, frigates the same, although not quite to the same level of disparity. Cruisers have 1 or 2 out of 4 options per race and are workable, but definately need attention.

I'll speak to the Amarr cruisers; Arbitrator needs a hair more PG (although it's currently one of the best ships in the lineup so very little is needed; I'd really just like the option of using medium guns), omen needs a full 10% more PG, maller needs a flight of light drones. Auguror is the redheaded step child; perhaps throw a dps bonus in there somewhere to make it an entry tier as you described. That should square it up for amarr. For BC's, the Proph needs about 10% more cap and PG buffed to just below Harby levels. Simply being able to fit larger guns will bring it's DPS high enough to be worth flying.

Other races I won't comment on due to lack of piloting experience.


I've not looked at the stats in enough detail, but I'd agreed that generally, it seems that powergrid requirements are what limits the lower tier Amarr ships as they stand. Buffing grid on ships like the prophecy and omen would be a good way to go. The Inquisitor and Crucifier could perhaps do with another couple of slots personally.
Lili Lu
#22 - 2011-10-22 19:29:55 UTC
The tier system is an artifact of the game by now. It made some sense back when characters started with a pitance of sp and the learning skills were in the game. At that time it actually meant something to move up the tiers. Buy a cheap ships because your training time into the top tier actually was measured in days up to a week.

Now however, the learning skills are gone, and there is accelerated training to start. The tiers mean nothing, because the time means nothing. There is no longer a choice of twiddling your thumbs in that destroyer or opting for the tier one cruiser because now the top tier cruiser is almost no time to get into.

Yes, tiers should go and be replaced by roles. Well, more correct to say should have gone. There is a very good by now very old thread about this in the old forums. I can't be arsed to search for it either though, but maybe someone will link it. Regardless, the issue is now moot.

Moot because of the rush to BC is so easy, and more BC caek is coming to the game. Canes and Drakes will still proliferate and the tier 1 BCs will still be slop to be forgotten and replaced by the new tier 3 BCs. The only way the frigs and cruisers (even if tiers were done away with) will come to mean something is if the sp bonanza at the start of the game gets reversed and we know that won't happen. Or, if these cheap ships get buffed so that they aren't automatic fodder for BCs and BSs, etc. And, that is unlikely to happen as well. Straight
Erim Solfara
House of Solfara
#23 - 2011-10-22 20:43:58 UTC
I'm afraid I don't agree with that Lili, I think if the cruiser and frigate lines had more padded out options, say for instance the crucifier/arbitrator option was more viable, then gangs of that ship size would be more effective, and more likely to be seen as counters to bruiser blobs. It'd add more tactics to the ship choices and would hopefully help combat drake-spam and the like.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2011-10-22 21:20:19 UTC
Max Von Sydow wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Phyress wrote:
I'm curious what industrial players think of tiers. I realize most players only think a difference in tiers means a difference in cost and number of guns, but the different mineral costs between tiers isn't something that should be so easily overlooked.


Most Mining barges have a very specific and unique purpose, ie the skiff is for deep core mining, mackinaw is for ice and the hulk is for ore. I feel tiered ships are ok if ther have a purpose for being tiered some are just bad ships.


Maybe so, but look at the T1 versions and you will see the problem, ie the procurer. There is currently no reason to use the procurer at all since it can be outmined by almost anything, is as slow as the bigger mining barges and since it takes just a few hours to get to mining barges lvl 3 everyone just skips the procurer and use the retriever instead.


On that same note the covetor takes so long to get to and by then you could fly a hulk they are just as useless as a procurer, but without those ships there would be nothing to make T2 ships with. I don't like that some ships have good T1 versions and then no T2 version, take the myrmidon and brutix, the brutix got 2 T2 hulls, the myrmidon would have made a n excellent command ship

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Max Von Sydow
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#25 - 2011-10-22 21:46:44 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Max Von Sydow wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Phyress wrote:
I'm curious what industrial players think of tiers. I realize most players only think a difference in tiers means a difference in cost and number of guns, but the different mineral costs between tiers isn't something that should be so easily overlooked.


Most Mining barges have a very specific and unique purpose, ie the skiff is for deep core mining, mackinaw is for ice and the hulk is for ore. I feel tiered ships are ok if ther have a purpose for being tiered some are just bad ships.


Maybe so, but look at the T1 versions and you will see the problem, ie the procurer. There is currently no reason to use the procurer at all since it can be outmined by almost anything, is as slow as the bigger mining barges and since it takes just a few hours to get to mining barges lvl 3 everyone just skips the procurer and use the retriever instead.


On that same note the covetor takes so long to get to and by then you could fly a hulk they are just as useless as a procurer, but without those ships there would be nothing to make T2 ships with. I don't like that some ships have good T1 versions and then no T2 version, take the myrmidon and brutix, the brutix got 2 T2 hulls, the myrmidon would have made a n excellent command ship


Well, the covetor is almost as good as the hulk in mining yield. it doesn't get the second bonus and cant fit a second MLU, but with max skills, the difference in yield is only 8.8%. so for mining in dangerous areas like WHs it's better to use a covetor than a hulk simply because the 8.8% increase in mining yield isn't worth it.
Desudes
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2011-10-22 23:03:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Desudes
I don't think its the tiering system that keeps ships like the Ferox from being used. Check this out:

blasters: close range pewpew, has trouble with tracking

rails: long range pewpew, just doesn't pewpew hard enough

^- optimal range bonus at the cost of no dmg bonus does fuckall for those weapon systems. It might be useful as an on-grid booster/FC ship since who the hell is going to shoot a Ferox?


Just pointing out that useless bonuses would need to be looked at, along with pg/cpu normalization...

Excuse me, but what the f*ck are you desu?

Ruah Piskonit
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#27 - 2011-10-22 23:40:27 UTC
Dorian Wylde wrote:
Oxeu wrote:
Ehe I don't know about you, but I use tier 1 BC/BS a lot for allt he right reasons because each ship is good at doing something. (granted ferox is meh)

So I see no sense in your reasoning.



You see no sense in making the dozens of frigates that have zero use because of terrible slot layouts, a direct result of the tier system, actually useful?


you have not been playing long have you.

the tier system is not fixed, its just a way of keeping track of what ship of what race is generally supposed to correspond to what ship of another race. Not some fixed system.

You use tiers to talk about two or more ships of the same tier, not a better worse comparison.
Max Von Sydow
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#28 - 2011-10-22 23:59:15 UTC
Ruah Piskonit wrote:
Dorian Wylde wrote:
Oxeu wrote:
Ehe I don't know about you, but I use tier 1 BC/BS a lot for allt he right reasons because each ship is good at doing something. (granted ferox is meh)

So I see no sense in your reasoning.



You see no sense in making the dozens of frigates that have zero use because of terrible slot layouts, a direct result of the tier system, actually useful?


you have not been playing long have you.

the tier system is not fixed, its just a way of keeping track of what ship of what race is generally supposed to correspond to what ship of another race. Not some fixed system.

You use tiers to talk about two or more ships of the same tier, not a better worse comparison.


the tier system is fixed, lower tier ships cost less to make, and require lower skill levels to use and as a result has lower hp/pg/cpu and less slots, making them worse ships than their higher tier brethren.
Erim Solfara
House of Solfara
#29 - 2011-10-23 00:55:07 UTC
Max Von Sydow wrote:
Ruah Piskonit wrote:
Dorian Wylde wrote:
Oxeu wrote:
Ehe I don't know about you, but I use tier 1 BC/BS a lot for allt he right reasons because each ship is good at doing something. (granted ferox is meh)

So I see no sense in your reasoning.



You see no sense in making the dozens of frigates that have zero use because of terrible slot layouts, a direct result of the tier system, actually useful?


you have not been playing long have you.

the tier system is not fixed, its just a way of keeping track of what ship of what race is generally supposed to correspond to what ship of another race. Not some fixed system.

You use tiers to talk about two or more ships of the same tier, not a better worse comparison.


the tier system is fixed, lower tier ships cost less to make, and require lower skill levels to use and as a result has lower hp/pg/cpu and less slots, making them worse ships than their higher tier brethren.



This, it's based on the skill level required to fly the ship, usually the racial ship class skill.
Panch0Villa
Corellian Logistics and Heavy Industries
#30 - 2011-10-23 05:12:26 UTC
Some of the other races' examples that I've observed.

Gallente BC lineup is interesting because it is nearly Tierless. Arguing about whether the Brutix or the Myrm is better is difficult because they are so different. The fact that the Myrm is a dedicated droneboat, while the Brutix is a dedicated Blasterboat means that they both handle their roles effectively, and are differentiated by the roles enough that you can't make an apples to apples comparison. The Dominix also falls into a specialized role, is popular because of its specialist role.

Caldari ECM boats are very interesting, in that there is simply no "upgrade" from an ECM boat, unless you go up in ship class. The ECM role is highly specialized, and because of this, you can't shoehorn other ship types into this role, you have to use the dedicated ship platforms of each ship class (Blackbird, Falcon, Scorpion), which makes them basically tierless. Unlike the other EW ships, ECM is basically hit or miss, and unless you've got a high enough jam strength, having an ineffective ECM module on your ship is useless. Because of this, if you want an ECM boat, you must use the specialized ships for that role.

Most frigates are heavily affected by the tier system, and it seems a shame to relegate them all to the hangar because they lack the slots or PG/CPU/hp to be useful. Case in point, the Vigil is probably the fastest frigate in the game, however I think the vast majority of pilots will use the Rifter instead due to its PG/CPU/hp stats, even though the Vigil is supposed to be a T1 interceptor. The same happens for any of the Tech 1 interceptor classes, simply because of the slot layout or PG/CPU/hp penalty that the tier system places on them.


I agree with the OP, and think the tier system is obsolete. Making all ships specialize in some role makes them equally usable, and increases diversity in both ship usage and tactics.
Ruah Piskonit
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#31 - 2011-10-23 06:32:19 UTC
so you want all ships to be equally useful?

that's not going to happen.

You want all ships to have good slot layouts, PG and CPU?

that's also not going to happen.

Why?

well, for one, because all ships were not created equal.

To be honest, there is no point to this post since the problem is not with the tier system, but with the fact that T1 frigs are generally underpowered - which they are supposed to be.
Max Von Sydow
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#32 - 2011-10-23 10:26:51 UTC
Ruah Piskonit wrote:
so you want all ships to be equally useful?

that's not going to happen.

You want all ships to have good slot layouts, PG and CPU?

that's also not going to happen.

Why?

well, for one, because all ships were not created equal.

To be honest, there is no point to this post since the problem is not with the tier system, but with the fact that T1 frigs are generally underpowered - which they are supposed to be.


not all T1 frigs are as underpowered, you see people using the rifter every day, and that's because it's the top tier minmatar frigate with a good slot layout making it useful for combat, unlike the slasher and the breacher. and the main problem is that there is not really any reason for these ships to be this much worse than the rifter since even a rookie is gonna go from slasher to rifter in maybe a few hours. Heck, I'm pretty sure they get rifters as mission rewards in the beginning, making the low tier frigs even unused among people who are still in their 14 day trial.
All we ask is that they get a buff so that they could at least be used to some extent. Making 3 combat frgiates for each race and only making a few of them useful seems extremely stupid and a waste of time for the people who actually made them in the first place.
Erim Solfara
House of Solfara
#33 - 2011-10-23 11:06:21 UTC
Ruah Piskonit wrote:
so you want all ships to be equally useful?

that's not going to happen.

You want all ships to have good slot layouts, PG and CPU?

that's also not going to happen.

Why?

well, for one, because all ships were not created equal.


To be honest, there is no point to this post since the problem is not with the tier system, but with the fact that T1 frigs are generally underpowered - which they are supposed to be.


That's the wonderful thing about virtual worlds, you aren't stuck with the way things were created. How is that an argument at all against changing things up?
Mashie Saldana
V0LTA
OnlyFleets.
#34 - 2011-10-23 15:55:37 UTC
I'm all for removing the tiers, especially if that means the Drake get the same stats as the Ferox.
Max Von Sydow
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#35 - 2011-10-23 16:43:34 UTC
Mashie Saldana wrote:
I'm all for removing the tiers, especially if that means the Drake get the same stats as the Ferox.


I think the ferox should rather get the same stats as the drake.
Jack Carrigan
Order of the Shadow
#36 - 2011-10-23 16:56:35 UTC
Tiers don't really mean **** when you know how to effectively employ them in a fleet, or solo:

Examples:

The Brutix-class Battlecruiser with a dual-web configuration makes an excellent point-defense against smaller craft that would normally be a pain in the *** during a fleet engagement. Also, they can deal significant DPS with or without drones (I've known people to fit Target Painter drones on their Brutix to aid missile boats in fleet, or ECM drones to assist with creating chaos among the enemy ranks).

The Dominix-class Battleship can effectively run an active tank, and remote reps while retaining cap stability, and being able to utilize drones to effectively engage incoming tacklers (utilizing lights), DPS ships (countering cruisers with mediums, or BC and up with Heavies), and aid in DPS by letting out a flight of Sentries.

So just before you think about doing away with tiers, just remember, everything has a role to fill if fit properly, and flown by a competent, skilled pilot.

I am the One who exists in Shadow. I am the Devil your parents warned you about.

||CEO: Order of the Shadow||Executor: The Revenant Order||Creator: Bowhead||

Erim Solfara
House of Solfara
#37 - 2011-10-23 17:13:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Erim Solfara
Jack Carrigan wrote:
Tiers don't really mean **** when you know how to effectively employ them in a fleet, or solo:

Examples:

The Brutix-class Battlecruiser with a dual-web configuration makes an excellent point-defense against smaller craft that would normally be a pain in the *** during a fleet engagement. Also, they can deal significant DPS with or without drones (I've known people to fit Target Painter drones on their Brutix to aid missile boats in fleet, or ECM drones to assist with creating chaos among the enemy ranks).

The Dominix-class Battleship can effectively run an active tank, and remote reps while retaining cap stability, and being able to utilize drones to effectively engage incoming tacklers (utilizing lights), DPS ships (countering cruisers with mediums, or BC and up with Heavies), and aid in DPS by letting out a flight of Sentries.

So just before you think about doing away with tiers, just remember, everything has a role to fill if fit properly, and flown by a competent, skilled pilot.


Congratulations on picking two ships that suffer least under the tier system in the categories discussed. What incredible role does the Prophecy play compared to the Harbinger that we have missed? Or the Inquisitor to the Punisher? Or any number of other examples.

I'm not going to argue example vs example. As a system, it's fundamentally flawed, nevermind individual balance issues. It's not necessarily flawed because of an imbalance of power either, moreso that it's making ships that already exist redundant for no sensible reason.
Max Von Sydow
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#38 - 2011-10-23 17:15:04 UTC
Jack Carrigan wrote:
Tiers don't really mean **** when you know how to effectively employ them in a fleet, or solo:

Examples:

The Brutix-class Battlecruiser with a dual-web configuration makes an excellent point-defense against smaller craft that would normally be a pain in the *** during a fleet engagement. Also, they can deal significant DPS with or without drones (I've known people to fit Target Painter drones on their Brutix to aid missile boats in fleet, or ECM drones to assist with creating chaos among the enemy ranks).

The Dominix-class Battleship can effectively run an active tank, and remote reps while retaining cap stability, and being able to utilize drones to effectively engage incoming tacklers (utilizing lights), DPS ships (countering cruisers with mediums, or BC and up with Heavies), and aid in DPS by letting out a flight of Sentries.

So just before you think about doing away with tiers, just remember, everything has a role to fill if fit properly, and flown by a competent, skilled pilot.


Maybe so, but for example the myrmidon can do almost the same dps as the brutix, and has more slots so it can fit more webs, and use more TP drones, so it can do the same things as the brutix as good if not better.
also, when it comes to battleships they dont really have tiers in the same way other ships do but are rather all made to fit a role. But when you look at other ship types the higher tier ships can do everything the lower tier ships can. a harbinger can get more ehp than a proph because it has more PG and lows, a drake is better than a ferox is pretty much every single way, and while the cyclone might be a better active shield tanker than the cane the cane is still better due to more guns and dual weapon bonuses + all those lows. and as I keep pointing out, each race has some T1 frigates that are made completely and utterly useless by the tier system, atron, slasher, executioner and condor dont have enough slots to be useful for anything, and the breacher and inqusitor could also have been useful given more slots but now they also suffer under the tier system. So when it comes to useful T1 combat frigates we have the rifter, punisher, kestrel, merlin, incursus and tristan. that means that half of the 12 combat frigates are made useless by this idiotic system.
Alaric Faelen
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#39 - 2011-10-23 18:28:45 UTC
I think Lilli explained the reason for the broken tier system pretty well. Changes in other parts of the game had ramifications on the choice of ships.
I submit for consideration that the fix may not lie in constantly tweaking ships but perhaps adjusting the skill training times. The Procurer is the classic example. It's a fine tier one ship (lackluster, but it's there to give you a ship for going with Barges instead of Cruiser on your path to a dedicated mining player) but ONLY if stepping up to a Retreiver wasn't a matter of a couple hours. Given that, the Procurer is an utter waste of isk.
The reason I hesitate to tweak the ships (much) is that the result is pretty much make them all the same. The idea of roles is nice, but making ships too focused at the lower end of the spectrum also limits their use by low SP characters, who are the people we are talking about, since anyone playing for a few months is well into specializing in some aspect of Eve and SP is no longer applicable for the low end, generalized types of ship (frig, cruiser, BC)
I don't know if getting rid of tiers is the answer, nor fiddling with the ships very much- but I agree that the system doesn't work very well right now and needs addressed. Drastically increase training time per level of ship piloting skill?
Erim Solfara
House of Solfara
#40 - 2011-10-23 18:50:15 UTC
That would only hurt newer players.

Any person investing into flying a ship will train up the relevant ship skill to at least level 3 ANYWAY, all having the lower tier option does is enable you to actually fly the ship a matter of hours before you otherwise would have done. Increasing the time between levels would mean longer grinds to fly ships well, and that'd be unfair on those starting the game after the change.

Much better to set the bar of entry to a ship class lower, and allow people to benefit from putting the training time in by taking advantage of a ship's unique 'per level' bonuses.