These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Legacy ASB Ships

First post First post
Author
Asakura Manji
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#1 - 2013-06-30 15:52:33 UTC
Are ships that have 13 charges in their ASB from before the capacity nerf was implemented allowed?
sevyn nine
Cutting Edge Incorporated
#2 - 2013-06-30 22:30:03 UTC
It would be ridiculous if they are allowed (it definitely goes against the spirit of a fair fight), but it would also be tough to check for this.
Professor Clio
Apocalypse Lancers
#3 - 2013-07-01 01:09:01 UTC
Of course they're allowed. Why shouldn't they? It's not any more unfair than allowing AT prize ships for that same point cost as normal ships, is it?
Buhhdust Princess
Mind Games.
Suddenly Spaceships.
#4 - 2013-07-01 09:35:03 UTC
I agree with clio on this one, this should be allowed!
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#5 - 2013-07-01 15:39:43 UTC
After some discussion internally we have decided to allow the legacy overloaded ASBs to be used in the tournament legally.

It's simply another method where collectibles can be used for moderate gain in a tournament environment.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Faffywaffy
Fremen Sietch
DarkSide.
#6 - 2013-07-02 05:22:48 UTC
In that case, WTS two sleipnirs with 13-charge XL-ASB each.
Destoya
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#7 - 2013-07-02 06:07:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Destoya
This is a terrible idea fozzie

edit: To expand on the above statement in more detail, I think this is bad because it in large part limits what kind of ships will be fielded. You reduced the number of charges as a balancing decision, which means you thought that ships with 45% more ASB charges than currently were overpowered compared to their non-ASB counterparts in whatever way you decide to look at it.

Not banning these ships also means that quite a lot of the effort that you personally as well as the rest of the balancing team put in over the past year in regards to balancing ships was largely pointless with regards to changes to the tournament metagame. It's harder to justify using the freshly rebalanced ships, alternate tanking methods such as AAR, or even new ships like the navy battlecruisers when your bread and butter Sleipnirs, Vargurs, Tengus, Golems, and Scimitars all have 40k+ more EHP from their ASB charges than theyre supposed to in real PVP conditions.

Not to mention that one of the more significant rule changes this year was the banning of 5/6% and other unique implants, thus reducing the barrier of entry for the tournament for the smaller teams. What this change in particular does is give a rather large innate advantage to the teams of the fabulously wealthy tournament giants; I'm sure PL, Hydra, Darkside, etc will all scramble to pay out the nose for 13 charge sleipnirs while it just isnt a realistic option for the newer, smaller, or more casual teams.

You say that this is an opportunity for teams to show off their collectors assets. The whole appeal of collector's ships from a spectator's point of view is the always-present potential for something incredibly valuable to die with a glorious explosion. These overloaded ASB ships offer none of that, since no spectator will be tell the difference from one with extra charges to one without, except that the overloaded ones seem to tank longer. From the competitor's point of view too this kind of sucks since there is no indication that their opponents are using overloaded ASB ships. When someone drops tournament prize ships you at least generally know the capabilities of the ships you face and can play around that, rather than having to guess whether a team of 3 sleipnirs will tank 113k more damage than they should before dying. This is even ignoring the fact that it is literally impossible for teams without these ships to reliably practice against them, since they are unavailable on Duality, something which contradicts the rest of the testing methods you have set up for us.
Nico Aristaeus
The Vendunari
End of Life
#8 - 2013-07-02 12:27:46 UTC
I agree with Destoya. This is terrible. Not being able to tell wether it is legacy or not throws the balance even more than just having to deal with the extra tank. Also, we cannot test against it as we cannot pick up these legacy ASB boats on the test server, contrary to collectables. Please reconsider.

There are two types of people: People that can extrapolate from incomplete data.

Kadesh Priestess
This Game Is Terrible
HYDRA RELOADED
#9 - 2013-07-02 12:33:49 UTC
Most of listed complaints apply to flagships too, i guess.
Nico Aristaeus
The Vendunari
End of Life
#10 - 2013-07-02 13:07:00 UTC
Well, there is only 1 flagship we have to take into account. I would not like an extra shitstorm in terms of unknown tank range on the field.

There are two types of people: People that can extrapolate from incomplete data.

CCP Veritas
C C P
C C P Alliance
#11 - 2013-07-02 15:09:16 UTC
Some excellent points brought up in this thread that we hadn't fully considered, specifically that overloaded ASBs cannot be seen nor practiced against.

However, there are some technical barriers in the way of us enforcing a no-overfull-modules rule - the same kind of barriers that are the reason overfull modules are allowed to exist in the first place. If I manage to get through the work I need to clear off in order for us to have a tournament, I will dedicate some time to finding a way around those issues.

So, as things currently stand, they will be allowed. If I get my tournament work done ahead of schedule, that will likely change. In any case, their status will not change once the tournament has begun.

We understand that this uncertainty complicates preparation for teams who have overfull modules at their disposal. We will communicate the status of this as the situation progresses and will reach a solid conclusion as soon as we can.

CCP Veritas - Technical Director - EVE Online

Arch Stanton's Neighbour
Forceful Resource Acquisition Inc
#12 - 2013-07-02 16:12:01 UTC
I distinctly recall more than a couple forum posts on the WTB section looking for ships with overloaded ASBs soon after the nerf that were explicitly to be used on the AT. Also shortly after the nerf was announced people discussed stockpiling those ships for such purposes.

Therefore IMHO anyone lacking them didn't really pay attention or care, so cry moar, HTFU, etc.
Logical Chaos
Very Italian People
The Initiative.
#13 - 2013-07-02 16:16:27 UTC
Money has always won tournaments or why have I never seen a known poor alliance at the top?

Some Officer Bhaalgorns would like to have a word with you regarding small and "poor" alliances being able to afford them. But yes you can prepare for that (i.e. get ready to be stomped by officer neut/webbing bhaal). Easy fix for 13 ASB Ships:

Simply make a rule that 13 ASB Ships have to be announced just like Flagships. There you go.
Nico Aristaeus
The Vendunari
End of Life
#14 - 2013-07-02 16:52:10 UTC
Arch Stanton's Neighbour wrote:
I distinctly recall more than a couple forum posts on the WTB section looking for ships with overloaded ASBs soon after the nerf that were explicitly to be used on the AT. Also shortly after the nerf was announced people discussed stockpiling those ships for such purposes.

Therefore IMHO anyone lacking them didn't really pay attention or care, so cry moar, HTFU, etc.

Fair point but it turns the AT into a meta game. Furthermore there may well be teams that did not know at nerf time they would participate. Also, why so rude?

There are two types of people: People that can extrapolate from incomplete data.

Logical Chaos
Very Italian People
The Initiative.
#15 - 2013-07-02 16:53:58 UTC
Nico Aristaeus wrote:
Arch Stanton's Neighbour wrote:
I distinctly recall more than a couple forum posts on the WTB section looking for ships with overloaded ASBs soon after the nerf that were explicitly to be used on the AT. Also shortly after the nerf was announced people discussed stockpiling those ships for such purposes.

Therefore IMHO anyone lacking them didn't really pay attention or care, so cry moar, HTFU, etc.

Fair point but it turns the AT into a meta game. Furthermore there may well be teams that did not know at nerf time they would participate. Also, why so rude?


AT is probably the biggest Meta event in EVE? Its all about spying on enemy tactics, setups, players and the connected weaknesses all while hiding your own tactics and setups from everyone else.
Nico Aristaeus
The Vendunari
End of Life
#16 - 2013-07-02 19:16:48 UTC
Logical Chaos wrote:
Nico Aristaeus wrote:
Arch Stanton's Neighbour wrote:
I distinctly recall more than a couple forum posts on the WTB section looking for ships with overloaded ASBs soon after the nerf that were explicitly to be used on the AT. Also shortly after the nerf was announced people discussed stockpiling those ships for such purposes.

Therefore IMHO anyone lacking them didn't really pay attention or care, so cry moar, HTFU, etc.

Fair point but it turns the AT into a meta game. Furthermore there may well be teams that did not know at nerf time they would participate. Also, why so rude?


AT is probably the biggest Meta event in EVE? Its all about spying on enemy tactics, setups, players and the connected weaknesses all while hiding your own tactics and setups from everyone else.

Well sure, lets assume you are right. Then still it does not mean that a higher degree of meta gaming by adding crap into the mix is better.

There are two types of people: People that can extrapolate from incomplete data.

Logical Chaos
Very Italian People
The Initiative.
#17 - 2013-07-02 19:22:02 UTC
Nico Aristaeus wrote:
Logical Chaos wrote:
Nico Aristaeus wrote:
Arch Stanton's Neighbour wrote:
I distinctly recall more than a couple forum posts on the WTB section looking for ships with overloaded ASBs soon after the nerf that were explicitly to be used on the AT. Also shortly after the nerf was announced people discussed stockpiling those ships for such purposes.

Therefore IMHO anyone lacking them didn't really pay attention or care, so cry moar, HTFU, etc.

Fair point but it turns the AT into a meta game. Furthermore there may well be teams that did not know at nerf time they would participate. Also, why so rude?


AT is probably the biggest Meta event in EVE? Its all about spying on enemy tactics, setups, players and the connected weaknesses all while hiding your own tactics and setups from everyone else.

Well sure, lets assume you are right. Then still it does not mean that a higher degree of meta gaming by adding crap into the mix is better.


You do realize, that EVE is so fun and different from all those other MMOs because of all the Meta involved? Else it would just be another MMO.

Anyway. If those ships are not allowed please be consistent and forbid usage of any limited edition ships including AT rewards. Also ditch that flag ship rule with officer fittings.

The "can not be seen" advantage can easily be neglected by having people announce that they have 13 charge ASBs loaded at the beginning of the match. People do not get more time to recognize the flagship as well.
Nico Aristaeus
The Vendunari
End of Life
#18 - 2013-07-02 19:38:11 UTC
Logical Chaos wrote:
Nico Aristaeus wrote:
Logical Chaos wrote:
Nico Aristaeus wrote:
Arch Stanton's Neighbour wrote:
I distinctly recall more than a couple forum posts on the WTB section looking for ships with overloaded ASBs soon after the nerf that were explicitly to be used on the AT. Also shortly after the nerf was announced people discussed stockpiling those ships for such purposes.

Therefore IMHO anyone lacking them didn't really pay attention or care, so cry moar, HTFU, etc.

Fair point but it turns the AT into a meta game. Furthermore there may well be teams that did not know at nerf time they would participate. Also, why so rude?


AT is probably the biggest Meta event in EVE? Its all about spying on enemy tactics, setups, players and the connected weaknesses all while hiding your own tactics and setups from everyone else.

Well sure, lets assume you are right. Then still it does not mean that a higher degree of meta gaming by adding crap into the mix is better.


You do realize, that EVE is so fun and different from all those other MMOs because of all the Meta involved? Else it would just be another MMO.

Anyway. If those ships are not allowed please be consistent and forbid usage of any limited edition ships including AT rewards. Also ditch that flag ship rule with officer fittings.

The "can not be seen" advantage can easily be neglected by having people announce that they have 13 charge ASBs loaded at the beginning of the match. People do not get more time to recognize the flagship as well.

Well, your last suggestions would be in line with the affordable for everyone kind of mindset CCP went with for this tourney. However, you still have not refuted the not being able to train against it part and I am also not convinced by your meta reasoning. Surely this game is fun and meta gaming makes it more fun. This does not imply that a higher degree of meta gaming is going to improve the game mechanic. The ASB introduction was a muck up as it was much too strong. The way I see it we are going to feel the remnants of this muck up on one of CCP's poster events more than a year after. Assuming we are not going to find common ground lets just respectfully disagree.

There are two types of people: People that can extrapolate from incomplete data.

Logical Chaos
Very Italian People
The Initiative.
#19 - 2013-07-02 19:51:40 UTC
Well the main thing that made ASB insanely strong were those dual ASB fits with Crystals, Drugs and T3 Bonuses.

This effectively allowed solo players to circumvent the crazy 60second reload time by having
a) more boosts through crystals and drugs
b) a second ASB for those 60 seconds

basically making the ship invulnerable as long as it had cap charges.

In the AT people will not have crystals and Drugs (they will likely also not field a Command T3 but a Command Ship which gives slightly lesser boosts).

Of course this does not leave the fact untouched that the 13charge ASB stays roughly twice as good as the old ASB. Compared to Tournament Reward Ships its quite a small thing imo.
Nico Aristaeus
The Vendunari
End of Life
#20 - 2013-07-02 20:04:04 UTC
Logical Chaos wrote:
Well the main thing that made ASB insanely strong were those dual ASB fits with Crystals, Drugs and T3 Bonuses.

This effectively allowed solo players to circumvent the crazy 60second reload time by having
a) more boosts through crystals and drugs
b) a second ASB for those 60 seconds

basically making the ship invulnerable as long as it had cap charges.

In the AT people will not have crystals and Drugs (they will likely also not field a Command T3 but a Command Ship which gives slightly lesser boosts).

Of course this does not leave the fact untouched that the 13charge ASB stays roughly twice as good as the old ASB. Compared to Tournament Reward Ships its quite a small thing imo.

Yeah I agree. I am just worried we will see a lot of one-sided matches involving shield fleets that might have been less one-sided without the 13ASB with a possibility that you might not be able to tell the difference between ships. I do not know if removing the 13ASB would radically change fleet compositions. Obviously AT price ships do radiacally change fleet compositions.

There are two types of people: People that can extrapolate from incomplete data.

123Next pageLast page