These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

AT XIV Rule Changes

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
CCP Logibro
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1 - 2016-07-26 16:44:00 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Logibro
Hey guys

Here is the place to discuss the changes we've made to the rules for AT XIV since the release of the original rules.

So far, these are the changes:

Quote:
Teams may field no more than one unique special edition ship at any given time.

The current list of unique special edition ships includes: Apocalypse Imperial Issue, Armageddon Imperial Issue, Megathron Federate Issue, Raven State Issue, Tempest Tribal Issue, Guardian-Vexor, Mimir, Adrestia, Vangel, Etana, Moracha, Chameleon, Fiend, Rabisu, Stratios Emergency Responder, Gold Magnate, Silver Magnate, Freki, Utu, Malice, Cambion, Chremoas, Whiptail, Imp, Caedes

Quote:
Heavy Interdictors have increased in points cost by 1 to 13

CCP Logibro // EVE Universe Community Team // Distributor of Nanites // Patron Saint of Logistics

@CCP_Logibro
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#2 - 2016-07-26 16:57:37 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
Current ruleset: https://community.eveonline.com/community/alliance-tournament/rules/

We don't currently foresee the need to make any other rules changes, but we of course reserve the right to do so if needed.

I also want to make sure everyone is aware that there will be two monthly EVE releases between now and the tournament start, and another release in between the 2nd and 3rd weekend (on October 11th). There likely will be some changes to EVE ships in some of these releases, so teams are advised to stay flexible in the specifics of their tactics.

One other clarification to make: Cosmetic variations of ships (such as the Rattlesnake Victory Edition) will be counted as their base ship and cannot be used to bypass hull limits or bans.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Ncc 1709
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Pandemic Horde
#3 - 2016-07-26 18:32:29 UTC
Can we get a link to the rules stickied in the forum please
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#4 - 2016-07-26 18:46:45 UTC
Ncc 1709 wrote:
Can we get a link to the rules stickied in the forum please


Good idea, done.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Arloste Rampage
Doomheim
#5 - 2016-07-26 21:11:01 UTC
does the special edition rule mean one special ship per comp or one unique special ship per comp, as in, woud malice and etana in one comp be ok? both special edition ships being unique, as in, not the same
Lucas Quaan
DEMONS OF THE HIDDEN MIST
TRUTH. HONOUR. LIGHT.
#6 - 2016-07-26 21:36:38 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I also want to make sure everyone is aware that there will be two monthly EVE releases between now and the tournament start, and another release in between the 2nd and 3rd weekend (on October 11th). There likely will be some changes to EVE ships in some of these releases, so teams are advised to stay flexible in the specifics of their tactics.

Will these changes include warfare link mechanics? If so, it would be pretty important to have that information early so we can at least simulate the behaviour in testing.
Annie Gardet
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#7 - 2016-07-27 08:37:21 UTC
Are overloaded ASB allowed this year ? I think we need some clarification about this.
SoulLess Zealot
Khaedra's Law
#8 - 2016-07-27 08:42:56 UTC
Arloste Rampage wrote:
does the special edition rule mean one special ship per comp or one unique special ship per comp, as in, woud malice and etana in one comp be ok? both special edition ships being unique, as in, not the same



Quote:
Teams may field no more than one unique special edition ship at any given time.


I would take this to mean no more that 1 special edition ship feilded by a team at a time. Ie a malice and etana would not be legal only one or the other
Arloste Rampage
Doomheim
#9 - 2016-07-27 10:54:20 UTC
SoulLess Zealot wrote:
Arloste Rampage wrote:
does the special edition rule mean one special ship per comp or one unique special ship per comp, as in, woud malice and etana in one comp be ok? both special edition ships being unique, as in, not the same



Quote:
Teams may field no more than one unique special edition ship at any given time.


I would take this to mean no more that 1 special edition ship feilded by a team at a time. Ie a malice and etana would not be legal only one or the other


just wondering if that unique-word is part of the special edition term, or if UNIQUE special edition ships have a hardcap of 1/comp
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#10 - 2016-07-27 11:24:38 UTC
It means that you can have just one of any of the listed ships in any given comp.

For instance:
2x Malice isn't allowed
Etana+Fiend also isn't allowed

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Teddy KGB
Red Warming
3200.
#11 - 2016-07-27 20:08:41 UTC
I think EW scripts like dampeners & tracking disruptors must be allowed this year, as sensor booster mechanics changed. Banning scripts for EW modules will make tournament too primitive in my opinion.
Jump SuperCaps Now
Doomheim
#12 - 2016-07-28 01:20:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Jump SuperCaps Now
If a flag ship is a "unique ship" can you still field another unique since the flag is the flag?

Example - Imperial Navy Apoc + Malice

or does it not matter if the flag is an unique?


Also how many pts are the ships like the Imperial Apoc / Tribal Tempest?

Are they 21 pts like faction ships? or 19 pts like navy ships?
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#13 - 2016-07-28 10:54:39 UTC
Jump SuperCaps Now wrote:
If a flag ship is a "unique ship" can you still field another unique since the flag is the flag?

Example - Imperial Navy Apoc + Malice

or does it not matter if the flag is an unique?


Also how many pts are the ships like the Imperial Apoc / Tribal Tempest?

Are they 21 pts like faction ships? or 19 pts like navy ships?


The flagship doesn't allow you to bypass limits on numbers of any ship type, so no a Imperial Navy Apoc + Malice would not be allowed.

The unique battleships are produced by the four empires so they count as navy faction battleships: 19 points.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Annie Gardet
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#14 - 2016-07-28 11:13:03 UTC
Annie Gardet wrote:
Are overloaded ASB allowed this year ? I think we need some clarification about this.
Cade Windstalker
#15 - 2016-07-28 14:30:01 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Current ruleset: https://community.eveonline.com/community/alliance-tournament/rules/

We don't currently foresee the need to make any other rules changes, but we of course reserve the right to do so if needed.

I also want to make sure everyone is aware that there will be two monthly EVE releases between now and the tournament start, and another release in between the 2nd and 3rd weekend (on October 11th). There likely will be some changes to EVE ships in some of these releases, so teams are advised to stay flexible in the specifics of their tactics.


Great that CCP is giving people a heads up on things like this, though could you maybe try not to land ship changes directly in the middle of the tournament? As a spectator it's generally just not as much fun to watch when everyone is scrambling to adapt to something. That's not to say that it can't make for fun moments, but more often than not IMO it doesn't.

I personally think the playerbase would understand if ship changes were pushed off into a point release so they don't interfere with the AT, and I believe CCP has done something similar in the past as well.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#16 - 2016-08-02 18:52:08 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
Annie Gardet wrote:
Are overloaded ASB allowed this year ? I think we need some clarification about this.


No, over-full modules will not be allowed this year.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#17 - 2016-08-02 20:02:59 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Current ruleset: https://community.eveonline.com/community/alliance-tournament/rules/

We don't currently foresee the need to make any other rules changes, but we of course reserve the right to do so if needed.

I also want to make sure everyone is aware that there will be two monthly EVE releases between now and the tournament start, and another release in between the 2nd and 3rd weekend (on October 11th). There likely will be some changes to EVE ships in some of these releases, so teams are advised to stay flexible in the specifics of their tactics.


Great that CCP is giving people a heads up on things like this, though could you maybe try not to land ship changes directly in the middle of the tournament? As a spectator it's generally just not as much fun to watch when everyone is scrambling to adapt to something. That's not to say that it can't make for fun moments, but more often than not IMO it doesn't.

I personally think the playerbase would understand if ship changes were pushed off into a point release so they don't interfere with the AT, and I believe CCP has done something similar in the past as well.


Benefits for the game as a whole always need to be higher priority than clearing the schedule around the tournament. The good news is that as always any game balance changes will impact all teams evenly, so the teams that prove to be the smartest will adjust faster and come out on top.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Cade Windstalker
#18 - 2016-08-04 17:48:53 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Benefits for the game as a whole always need to be higher priority than clearing the schedule around the tournament. The good news is that as always any game balance changes will impact all teams evenly, so the teams that prove to be the smartest will adjust faster and come out on top.


Fair enough, thanks for the response!

Looking forward to both the tournament and incoming balance changes! (In before someone fields a team of Exhumers xD)
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#19 - 2016-08-04 18:28:02 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Benefits for the game as a whole always need to be higher priority than clearing the schedule around the tournament. The good news is that as always any game balance changes will impact all teams evenly, so the teams that prove to be the smartest will adjust faster and come out on top.


Fair enough, thanks for the response!

Looking forward to both the tournament and incoming balance changes! (In before someone fields a team of Exhumers xD)


Truestory: we don't allow Exhumers in the tournament because we're afraid someone would actually bring battleskiffs and tank for days.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Cade Windstalker
#20 - 2016-08-07 23:36:32 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Benefits for the game as a whole always need to be higher priority than clearing the schedule around the tournament. The good news is that as always any game balance changes will impact all teams evenly, so the teams that prove to be the smartest will adjust faster and come out on top.


Fair enough, thanks for the response!

Looking forward to both the tournament and incoming balance changes! (In before someone fields a team of Exhumers xD)


Truestory: we don't allow Exhumers in the tournament because we're afraid someone would actually bring battleskiffs and tank for days.


Oh geez, that's hilarious xD

Thanks for sharing CCP Fozzie, you're the best. BRB laughing my socks off. LolLolLol
12Next page