These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Max Von Sydow
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#81 - 2011-12-02 18:34:14 UTC
Esan Vartesa wrote:


So, Khanid ships.


Kinda, though calling them T1 khanid ships would be like calling the gallente T1 droneboats "CreoDron ships".
And it would be nice with amarr having a more clear secondary weapon.
Lucas Schuyler
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#82 - 2011-12-02 20:46:21 UTC
Erim Solfara wrote:
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 incredibly 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.



What is the alternative? We have a generic Frigate, Cruiser, BC, and BS? Because everyone wants the "best" right? So we just have one and be done with it.

Who cares if Rifter is "best" T1 Frigate? Someone has to be "best." Delete it from the database and tomorrow a new "best" T1 Frigate would be crowned.

Not every ship can be made equally desirable/useful/whatever.
Max Von Sydow
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#83 - 2011-12-02 21:12:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Max Von Sydow
Lucas Schuyler wrote:


Who cares if Rifter is "best" T1 Frigate? Someone has to be "best." Delete it from the database and tomorrow a new "best" T1 Frigate would be crowned.

Not every ship can be made equally desirable/useful/whatever.


Once again someone does not grasp the concept of balance.
The idea is simply to give each T1 ship a role, and make them as good at their roles as the other ships are at theirs.

Kind of like a HAC vs a recon, they are not similar in any way but size, and they have extremely different roles, but both can still be equally useful in their own ways. That's what we want with but T1 ships. Unfortunately a lot of ships cannot perform their intended roles because they are lower tier ships and thus got lower pg/cpu and slots than the higher tier ships.
Masatoshi Hamada
Doomheim
#84 - 2011-12-03 00:03:07 UTC
I agree. Especially at battle cruisers, where it is a progression line. The Ferox it has no chance when faced with Drake, and the same with Cyclone and Hurricane. Latter is just better. What should be done is either to making tiers smaller or just throw them out. Like using frigate for an example:

Atron, Navitas and Imicus are not really as combat oriented as Incurses, Tristan, Maulus. In this way I could see a tier work, such as pre-logistic cruisers (how Exequor is to Onieros) not be as good as Celestis, Vexor or Thorax. There are only three battle cruisers though, so some it would be a good idea to throw tiers out of. Each battle cruiser can have a specific role rather than latter being a direct upgrade.
Ines Tegator
Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc.
#85 - 2011-12-03 19:30:19 UTC
mkjkgkvk Melkan wrote:
Getting rid of the teir system to add an extra 15+ ships that are currently not flown to the eve universe is probably the best thing CCP could spend their time on...

Bumping to front page with the best quote of the thread. Really, what else has this kind of reward/time ratio for dev resources?

Overhaul Dscan!
Arr0wyx
State War Academy
Caldari State
#86 - 2011-12-03 20:35:49 UTC
mkjkgkvk Melkan wrote:
Getting rid of the teir system to add an extra 15+ ships that are currently not flown to the eve universe is probably the best thing CCP could spend their time on...

More variety more tactics more fun dont even need to spend the time designing new ships. Balancing might not go off perfect first time but who cares really. Worthy worthy thread

Not empty quoting.
Max Von Sydow
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#87 - 2011-12-04 18:32:31 UTC
Ines Tegator wrote:
mkjkgkvk Melkan wrote:
Getting rid of the teir system to add an extra 15+ ships that are currently not flown to the eve universe is probably the best thing CCP could spend their time on...

Bumping to front page with the best quote of the thread. Really, what else has this kind of reward/time ratio for dev resources?
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#88 - 2011-12-04 18:55:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
The tier system has NEVER worked properly. It was supposed to give us the choice between good, expensive hulls and cheaper hulls with less performance. T2 modules and drones as well as rigs made it so that the more expensive ship has nearly always the better performance versus cost ratio.

In other words, the tier system is completely obsolete and responsible for lack of variation in ships being used. Instead of giving us choices, it takes them away.
Bap1811
Shiva
Northern Coalition.
#89 - 2011-12-04 20:45:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Bap1811
Ines Tegator wrote:
Logical Chaos wrote:
And the Amarr T1 BC is only viable as massive brick. But because everybody knows its a Brick no one (or few) will fall for it being used as bait.

So I would strongly recommend to rework some T1 BCs before making T3 BCs.


Take the Proph and Harby into EFT and fit both for the biggest tank you can. The Harby will win, because of more slots and more PG. Don't let common wisdom fool you, the Harby outclasses the tier 1 in every way simply due to the increased space.

Strongly support bolded comment BTW.


Just thought I'd point this out:

[Prophecy, Tank]
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Damage Control II

[empty med slot]
[empty med slot]
[empty med slot]

[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]

Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I

152K EHP.


[Harbinger, Tank]
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Damage Control II

[empty med slot]
[empty med slot]
[empty med slot]
[empty med slot]

[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]
[empty high slot]

Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I

123K EHP.

Theres a reason people use the prop for the job you know. Even if you add 2 LSE's and 2 invuls to the harby the proph still wins without shield mods.
Sephiroth Clone VII
Brothers of Tyr
Goonswarm Federation
#90 - 2011-12-04 22:06:38 UTC
I agree, the tiers should not be a scaling better in stats and mineral cost but different weapon systems and bonuses.

Example ferox compared with drake, one has more hp then the other and slots, in both the tanking and primary weapon slots. Primary weapon slots and number of other slots define the power of the ship for the two keys, ganking and tanking. The only case of a lower teir gunship being more favored then a higher teir is because of poor slot layout (hyperthron to mega).

Yes, some differences exist between ships already exist, but the lower teirs are gimped with the higher ones, so its not a choice between two, most anyone opting for the higher teir with only a few exceptions.

A way to fix it for amar battleships is to keep the total number of slots the same along with the hp, and mineral cost the same but mix up the bonuses and weapon systems. Have one be a range and cap bonus ship, tanking and damage, off racial weapon system (missiles or drones) and tanking.

The new teir 3 bcs are a good example of balancing between ships. The teir 2s are much better at tanking in both bonuses, base ship stats and slots, so it compensates for the ability of teir 3s to fit a full set of battle ship sized guns. No person in right mind would use tier 1 but at least its two choices vs 1.
mkjkgkvk Melkan
Doomheim
#91 - 2011-12-05 00:31:14 UTC
Appreciating the love for my post, voice of a generation yall
Max Von Sydow
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#92 - 2011-12-06 20:37:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Max Von Sydow
DarkAegix
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#93 - 2011-12-07 01:00:46 UTC
Agreed.
We effectively have dozens of new ships ready to be released.

New 'new player' argument is baloney.
When I began playing, I remember choosing the following progression:
Velator (You've gotta start somewhere)
Atron (Free mission reward)
Catalyst (ZOMG 8 TURRETZ!!!!! Yes, I skipped the Tristan & Incursus, not even knowing they existed. Also, I fit my Cat with lasers and ACs)
Thorax (Most turrets)
Brutix (Most turrets)
Megathron (Oooh, missile bays! I've never fired a missile before! I want missiles!)

Clearly, not the best reason for selecting ships, and the Atron was merely a stepping stone. Now it's entirely useless.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#94 - 2011-12-07 01:17:55 UTC
On my first character (not Liang), I went from the Ibis to the Bantam. Then I virtually bankrupted myself to buy a Badger Mk I and haul NPC goods. Then I ran across some friends that played Eve from my CS clan and moved into a Cormorant and Moa and low sec piracy. Flaming Erectile Phallacy convinced me that I should fly Gallente and I moved into a Vexor and 0.0. Did you know a noob can speed/sig tank 1.8M ISK triple Guristas spawns in a Vexor? :D

Anyway, from there to a Myrm and 0.0 piracy. When we finally got kicked out of Deklein I moved back to low sec and holy **** did the sentry guns **** up my drones. Off to the Drake I went and I guess I never really looked back.

Ah, memories. :)

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Anya Ohaya
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#95 - 2011-12-07 02:50:52 UTC
Phyress wrote:
I'm curious what industrial players think of tiers.


Tier 5 indies = best indies.
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#96 - 2011-12-07 04:20:11 UTC
Tech 1 frigates do need love. Maybe not bringing everything up to the level of Rifter/Punisher/Merlin/whetever people reckon is the least sucky Gallente one (hint, they all suck), but certainly making them more survivable a choice for both PVE and PVP.

For cruisers, again, a little love for the tier 1 cruisers and tier 2 cruisers could be handy in some situations. For example, augorors, scythes are useless "logi" ships (execqurors and ospreys are awesome, however).

Battlecruisers...i think people are just being dumb here. Cyclone can't win vs Cane? Excuse me. Fit your Cyclone better, get a 65K EHP 720DPS nanoclone and tell me it sucks and can't take out a 45K EHP nanocane. Fit duel-rep AC prophecy and tell me its useless for anything except being a brick. Feroxes with the hybrid buff can now be useful in sniper fleets and as blaster boats.

Tier 3 BC's...hell, when you can soloa 1280DPS Talos in a Thrasher, I don't think they are OP, people just need to fight smarter.

Getting rid of the tier system isn't the problem, it's CCP going back to revisit some of the hulls and say, now T2 mods are ubiquitous and the dynamic has changed to buffer/gank, welpcane, alphafleet or drakeblob "Do these ships need a few bits more PG or an extra slot or bonus tweak to make them useful."

But in the end, if you can garner as many kills in a Cyclone as me, and you fall in love with it, then you're probably a nutcase beyond convincing.

~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Erim Solfara
House of Solfara
#97 - 2011-12-07 16:37:28 UTC
I'm going to re-post my first comments on this matter, as I still think they're valid and the discussion is moving apace, with people still showing confusion about possible schemes.

Erim Solfara wrote:
My thoughts are that the tier system does have some noteworthy merit to new players, but is far too pervasive at the moment, so I would suggest this change.

The starting point for balancing ships should be that all ships in a class are equally potent, albeit with their own specialities in that class. For instance, the Omen and Maller should be similarly useful, with the use of either depending on choice of gank or tank.


Secondly, once a class has approximately 3 ships in it, it should then be considered that a stepping stone into that class is required, and a low tier option or two should be added.


So using Amarr cruisers as the example, once the Maller, Omen, and Abitrator are balanced against each other, the Augoror would remain low-tier and low-cost.

Frigates (again, Amarr for simplicity), would have the Punisher, Inquisitor, and the Crucifier at the top, with equal potential. Beneath them would be the Magnate, Executioner, and Tormentor.
You'd have three viable combat options for older players, with their roles intact, an entry-level combat frigate (Executioner) as an upgrade for the burgeoning combat pilot, and similar entry-level ships for two other professions.

This is a well populated ship class, so it works out nicely. What about when the class has alot fewer ships in it?


Let's take battlecruisers as a further example; we have tier 1s and tier 2s, and essentially, tier 1s are useless as the training time and cost difference between them for anything other than a very cash-strapped and rushing new player is meaningless.

With the new 'logic', you would assume the class didn't have enough ships to warrant a low tier option (cruisers basically serve the bruisers in this way anyway), and balance them accordingly.




Addendum: This post was written before the introduction of the tier 3 bruisers, and I don't think it's proper to discuss them in the same balancing drive as the tier 1 and 2 ships, they are essentially a different ship class in my opinion.
Ines Tegator
Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc.
#98 - 2011-12-10 19:10:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Ines Tegator
Weekend discussion bump.

Also, just to point out there is a sister thread in the suggestions forum. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=467771#post467771

Overhaul Dscan!
Airborne Ninja
Sunflower Plaza
#99 - 2011-12-10 23:24:00 UTC
The cyclone, ferox, and prophecy are worthless shitbirds that are absolutely outperformed by their tier 2 counterparts.

Ines Tegator
Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc.
#100 - 2011-12-11 01:04:57 UTC
Airborne Ninja wrote:
The cyclone, ferox, and prophecy are worthless shitbirds that are absolutely outperformed by their tier 2 counterparts.


Precisely. Let's fix em by re-making tiers into roles, instead of as, you know, tiers.

Overhaul Dscan!