These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

Nestor battleship disallowed in Alliance Tournament XII

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#21 - 2014-08-12 00:20:16 UTC
Altaen wrote:
Super happy about the Nestor change, but I disagree that there is no place competitively for the existing Nestor. I'd even go as far as to say that it's quite standard in the AT format for a number of battleships not to utilize their highslots for much more than Drone Link Augmentors, Neuts, Energy Transfers, and smartbombs. I suppose you really can't think of a use for an armor resist bonused drone bonused battleship with a ton of mids in this competition?

That said, I think it's poor form to ban a ship 5 days before match day, and worse form to change ship stats during a multi-week competition that many players put a lot of time into practicing for. I'd like to think that the new release schedule could allow for the agility to avoid such things.

I mean obviously you can't allow combat refitting in this tournament...but a release schedule that ignores the tournament cycle entirely is irresponsible.


The problem isNOT the lack of a competitive place fo the Nestor. The problem is the changes make the Nestor WAY TOO POTENT for the current AT point distribution.

Specifically, it is the ability to refit on the field that makes the Nestor incredibly powerful:

You can suddenly swap hardeners to efficiently tank your opponents dps. You can suddenly swap jams to match your opponents ship types. You can suddenly refit damps or tracks to neutralize a particular threat. You can suddenly swap warfare links to optimize your fighting style. You can suddenly swap out burned out modules. The adaptability a Nestor brings to the field is worth WAY more than 20 pts.
J A Aloysiusz
Risk Breakers
SONS of BANE
#22 - 2014-08-12 00:35:02 UTC
Suitonia wrote:
roigon wrote:
Fozzie, I know it's probably not you. But it would be really nice if CCP started considering the AT as something that mattered a little bit.

You know, instead of planning updates in the middle of the tournament, not giving duality the resources it needs. And banning a ship from use 5 days before the first match.


Sorry but I find this post rude and disgusting quite frankly.

CCP Fozzie, CCP Rise and the entire CCP AT team often spend countless hours of their own personal time and commitment not on the payroll helping with the Alliance Tournament. Duality is a privilege not a right, and the only reason why you have it this year is down to the endeavors of the CCP staff, namely CCP Merovingian. You're more than welcome to test on Singularity or Tranquility.

You honestly can't expect CCP to delay healthy game balance changes and updates for the rest of the 300,000 people playing this game to satisfy us, the minority, that is taking place in the Alliance Tournament.

The Nestor would not have the changes which would make it game-breaking until August 26th. Until Hyperion, it would have just been a 20 point ship which couldn't use half it's bonuses, which is why CCP Fozzie quite rightly said that it won't have much impact on competitive setups. The reason why it's banned instead of simply adding the amendment that you just can't refit on it is probably for clarity and ease of making sure teams keep to the rules because policing teams to make sure they don't refit using the Nestor during a match is probably something that is either not possible or very difficult to do with their current set of tournament tools.


I think suitonia's post was too short and wasn't particularly clear, so I'm not sure if I agree with him/her. In my opinion, it's quite sad that the alliance tournament is reliant on a few devs devoting their personal time. As a premier community event that attracts many new players, it should be handled professionally by the company, not thrown upon a few staff members.
Greg Valanti
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2014-08-12 02:51:44 UTC
roigon wrote:
You know, instead of planning updates in the middle of the tournament,


From a spectator point of view, I actually really liked the mid-tournament balance changes that happened during the last NEO.

Not only does it keep you from seeing the same fleet comps over and over again several weeks in a row, I think the ability to quickly adapt new fleet comps based on the changing meta-game is a skill that a championship winning alliance ought to be able to demonstrate, and the updates affords them that opportunity.
Morwen Lagann
Tyrathlion Interstellar
#24 - 2014-08-12 04:29:06 UTC
Suitonia wrote:
roigon wrote:
Fozzie, I know it's probably not you. But it would be really nice if CCP started considering the AT as something that mattered a little bit.

You know, instead of planning updates in the middle of the tournament, not giving duality the resources it needs. And banning a ship from use 5 days before the first match.


Sorry but I find this post rude and disgusting quite frankly.

Frankly, it's not. It is a harsh but not uncommon, and well-evidenced assessment of the situation.

Suitonia wrote:
CCP Fozzie, CCP Rise and the entire CCP AT team often spend countless hours of their own personal time and commitment not on the payroll helping with the Alliance Tournament. Duality is a privilege not a right, and the only reason why you have it this year is down to the endeavors of the CCP staff, namely CCP Merovingian. You're more than welcome to test on Singularity or Tranquility.

That they may, but...

Suitonia wrote:
You honestly can't expect CCP to delay healthy game balance changes and updates for the rest of the 300,000 people playing this game to satisfy us, the minority, that is taking place in the Alliance Tournament.

After all the talk about wanting EVE to be taken at least semi-seriously as an e-sport over the last year or so, yes, we damn well can and should expect precisely that of them. We should expect far more engagement and resources from the company as a whole surrounding their flagship PVP tournament.

Morwen Lagann

CEO, Tyrathlion Interstellar

Coordinator, Arataka Research Consortium

Owner, The Golden Masque
Kadesh Priestess
Descendance.
GoonSwarm.
#25 - 2014-08-12 06:28:58 UTC
J A Aloysiusz wrote:
As a premier community event that attracts many new players
hey
i think i found fallacious claim in your post
Nico Aristaeus
The Vendunari
End of Life
#26 - 2014-08-12 12:18:11 UTC
TheMercenaryKing wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
TheMercenaryKing wrote:
Any thoughts of allowing the Nestor as a logi ship in the future? It seems kind of biased to exclude a ship.


We exclude a lot of ships that would lead to a less exciting and varied tournament environment. In general, we have a lot of rules that limit tanking potential since a completely tank focused tournament would be bad for everyone involved.

This is also the reason why we no longer allow multiple logistics cruisers, for instance.


From what I can tell the following sub-capitals (Anything above orca/freighter) are not allow:
Mining Barges
Exhumers
Mining Frigates(?)
T2 Industrial
Shuttles
Rookie Ships
Nestor

I can understand disallowing more than one logistics ship, but I think it would be better to make it so that people can be multiple logistic ships but limit it so only one has the ability to repair. This would allow teams to bring a nestor, but they would need to choose to use it for repping or combat+Other ship.


Sorry to say but you are pretty wrong. You are allowed to bring as many logi ships as you want but you are limited to 3 of the same hulls max. The rules state: "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." This already prohibited using more than 1 ship with RR mods or more than 2 frigates and putting remote repair modules on a Nestor to begin with. Imagine a logi Nestor supported by Hyperions with heavy rep drones.... The horror!

There are two types of people: People that can extrapolate from incomplete data.
Tyrus Tenebros
State War Academy
Caldari State
#27 - 2014-08-12 14:30:57 UTC
Nico Aristaeus wrote:
TheMercenaryKing wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
TheMercenaryKing wrote:
Any thoughts of allowing the Nestor as a logi ship in the future? It seems kind of biased to exclude a ship.


We exclude a lot of ships that would lead to a less exciting and varied tournament environment. In general, we have a lot of rules that limit tanking potential since a completely tank focused tournament would be bad for everyone involved.

This is also the reason why we no longer allow multiple logistics cruisers, for instance.


From what I can tell the following sub-capitals (Anything above orca/freighter) are not allow:
Mining Barges
Exhumers
Mining Frigates(?)
T2 Industrial
Shuttles
Rookie Ships
Nestor

I can understand disallowing more than one logistics ship, but I think it would be better to make it so that people can be multiple logistic ships but limit it so only one has the ability to repair. This would allow teams to bring a nestor, but they would need to choose to use it for repping or combat+Other ship.


Sorry to say but you are pretty wrong. You are allowed to bring as many logi ships as you want but you are limited to 3 of the same hulls max. The rules state: "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." This already prohibited using more than 1 ship with RR mods or more than 2 frigates and putting remote repair modules on a Nestor to begin with. Imagine a logi Nestor supported by Hyperions with heavy rep drones.... The horror!



Nope

Quote:
Ships & Points

Each team has 100 points with which to select their ships.

Each team may have up to 12 ships on the battlefield.

Teams may field no more than 3 of a given ship. This applies to specifically named ships only, and not ship hulls. For example, 3 Merlins, 3 Hawks, and 3 Harpies would be legal.

Unlike in the New Eden Open II, “skinned” variants of ships count as their base ships and cannot be used to bypass hull limits or bans.

Teams may field no more than 1 logistics ship, or 1 tech one support cruiser, or 2 support frigates.

Teams may field no more than 1 marauder in each match.



Given the RR restriction, that second rule is quite silly, but there it is.

I believe that they should relax it as the... at least the potential for... dual logistics as a distraction meta (and at least theoretically bonused Tracking Links on the Onieros?) would be at least fun to look at.
Clint Chase
Dinner Plate Special
#28 - 2014-08-12 22:05:26 UTC
Suitonia wrote:
roigon wrote:
Fozzie, I know it's probably not you. But it would be really nice if CCP started considering the AT as something that mattered a little bit.

You know, instead of planning updates in the middle of the tournament, not giving duality the resources it needs. And banning a ship from use 5 days before the first match.


Sorry but I find this post rude and disgusting quite frankly.

CCP Fozzie, CCP Rise and the entire CCP AT team often spend countless hours of their own personal time and commitment not on the payroll helping with the Alliance Tournament. Duality is a privilege not a right, and the only reason why you have it this year is down to the endeavors of the CCP staff, namely CCP Merovingian. You're more than welcome to test on Singularity or Tranquility.

You honestly can't expect CCP to delay healthy game balance changes and updates for the rest of the 300,000 people playing this game to satisfy us, the minority, that is taking place in the Alliance Tournament.

The Nestor would not have the changes which would make it game-breaking until August 26th. Until Hyperion, it would have just been a 20 point ship which couldn't use half it's bonuses, which is why CCP Fozzie quite rightly said that it won't have much impact on competitive setups. The reason why it's banned instead of simply adding the amendment that you just can't refit on it is probably for clarity and ease of making sure teams keep to the rules because policing teams to make sure they don't refit using the Nestor during a match is probably something that is either not possible or very difficult to do with their current set of tournament tools.


tl;dr

'Let them eat cake.'
Bei ArtJay
Side Kicks
Unspoken Alliance.
#29 - 2014-08-12 23:26:52 UTC
Feign Disorder please post you Nestor comp so we can laugh at it thanx
Rayo Atra
Guardians of the Volatile Wine
#30 - 2014-08-13 00:14:01 UTC
lul'd

Tell you what I do like though: A killer. A dyed-in-the-wool killer. Cold-blooded, clean, methodical and thorough.

-Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
Tyrus Tenebros
State War Academy
Caldari State
#31 - 2014-08-13 14:46:47 UTC
Bei ArtJay wrote:
Feign Disorder please post you Nestor comp so we can laugh at it thanx

3x Nestor
3x Venture
0x F***s Given
roigon
TURN LEFT
#32 - 2014-08-13 16:47:31 UTC
Tyrus Tenebros wrote:
Bei ArtJay wrote:
Feign Disorder please post you Nestor comp so we can laugh at it thanx

3x Nestor
3x Venture
0x F***s Given


Confirming.

Dem roids will never know what hit them.
Radius Prime
Tax Evading Ass.
#33 - 2014-08-13 22:37:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Radius Prime
nvm bs

Reopen the EVE gate so we can invade Serenity. Goons can go first.
poerkie
Out of Focus
Odin's Call
#34 - 2014-08-15 13:18:02 UTC  |  Edited by: poerkie
there goes our backup plan :(((((((((((((((((((( seriously
Previous page12