These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Why do people say the rifter is bad?

Author
Fek Mercer
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#101 - 2017-01-08 09:46:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Fek Mercer
Kamala Sakar wrote:
Fek Mercer wrote:
Salvos is saying that the fit/ship primarily determines the outcome of a fight, whereas remiel aslo said the same thing in that the fit was what let him win the talos fight, and that fits determine a good pilot. You are both saying the same thing with a different set of clothes. can we get back to the rifter now please?


Sorry for sort of derailing your quite interesting topic with my innocent remark on how I as a newbie percieve the PvP part of EVE, guess I should have known the no 1 rule here on the forum which is: STAY ON TOPIC Straight



This topic ended in a tragic train traumatizer a while ago. also congrats on 100th comment
Salvos Rhoska
#102 - 2017-01-08 09:47:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Fek Mercer wrote:
Salvos is saying that the fit/ship primarily determines the outcome of a fight, whereas remiel aslo said the same thing in that the fit was what let him win the talos fight, and that fits determine a good pilot. You are both saying the same thing with a different set of clothes. can we get back to the rifter now please?


The fit possibilities are also primarily determined by the ship stats.
Only secondary to that comes a pilots choices in how to fit it.

The same concept remains true.
Ship stats are primary, pilot capability is secondary and restricted by the former.

When we discuss ship balance, the capability of individual pilots to fly them, is inconsequential.
Even if the finest PvP pilot EVE has ever seen flies a "bad" ship well, it does not change that it is still a bad ship by stats.

Remiel is trying to argue ship balance based on their ego and how good pilots they are.
That is irrelevant to the issue of the actual stats of ships.

You wanted to discuss the rifters stats and balance.
Remiel just wants to brow-beat you that you are a bad pilot flying it badly.

Im trying to help you get the thread back on track to discuss the ship itself.
He just wants to call you bad at flying it.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#103 - 2017-01-08 12:45:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
I see Salvos is spamming more tantrums again. Roll

OP, the Rifter is a fine ship. Salvos loves to strawman and make stuff up, but nowhere did I say or imply that you are bad with it. Salvos is probably bad with it, but that's just because he's bad with everything.

What I actually said was, any ship can be good in the hands of a capable pilot. I didn't say that a ship is only bad if the pilot is bad, because a pilot could be new to the game, or new to the ship itself. You know what? The Vengeance is a remarkable ship, but it's one I'm still trying to wrap my skills around because I'm relatively new to it myself, and as such, I'm much weaker in it than I am in ships I'm more familiar with. I've been theorycrafting ships though for almost half a decade on this game now, and if you hit me up in-game, I can help you with a few really mean Rifter fits, and even teach you to fly them effectively. Someone commented earlier that the Tristan is superior - I know why he said that, but a Rifter can be fit to take down kiters quite effectively and is probably one of the most capable T1s that can be fit for brawling and be capable of taking down kiters at the same time. I can show you how.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Salvos Rhoska
#104 - 2017-01-08 12:47:03 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
I see Salvos is spamming more tantrums again. Roll


No, that is your thing.

I'm just rationally, respectfully, calmly and reasonably replying to the posts that people have addressed here to me.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#105 - 2017-01-08 12:56:24 UTC
Whatever Salvos. All you do is strawman and lie, and pretend you're bigger and better than you are, and then throw tantrums when you're challenged on it, and then sperge on about how everyone else is wrong and only you can ever be right. That is literally all you ever do. Meanwhile, your KB still has 0 kills and 4 losses, showing how little you understand about PVP and how ships can and are used. I can demonstrate, in game, why and how everything you've said in this thread is wrong. "Ship fittings are bound by their stats hurdur". Wrong. I can still put multicannons on a Vengeance if I want, and if I need more PG to jam dual XLASB on a Cyclone, that's what ancil current routers and other PG enhancers are for. I have no doubt though, Salvos, that you wouldn't have the first idea just how versatile and non-cookie-cutter fitting ships in EVE can be.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Maekchu
Doomheim
#106 - 2017-01-08 13:41:09 UTC
I think both Remiel and Salvos are correct. The truth probably lies somewhere between both. Both piloting skills and stats will decide the outcomes of fights.

An example of a person who took the Rifter to another level was Crake Gaterau. During his time with The Black Rebel Rifter Club, he flew almost exclusively Rifters and made some very impressive killmails. This was even before the buff to the Rifters PWG. If you've done solo PvP, then you know that manual piloting and knowing different effective ranges of a module does make a difference on the outcome of a fight. An easy example would be a AB Blaster MSE Merlin vs a scram kiting Rifter. The Merlin has better stats, however the Merlin has a very short range on it's dps. If the Rifter then adjust his range to get outside of the Merlins blaster, he will still win even with less stats.

However, sometimes stats will determine the outcome no matter what you do. A simple, but not realistic example would be the Corvette vs Carrier. Someone mentioned that given enough time, the Corvette would kill the Carrier. That is incorrect, since the Corvette would never be able to break the passive tank of a Carrier. So no matter what, a SINGLE Corvette won't be able to break a Carrier, you need quite a few (But it can be done given enough).

A more realistic example and something more often encountered, is MWD kiter vs AB Brawler. Let us say you are in the AB brawling ship, then sometimes you may take a fight against a MWD kiter, because you hope they don't know how to negate a slingshot move. However, if the person is not completely nub and the agility of the MWD kiter is high enough, then it is basically impossible to slingshot. I'd consider, that here the stats predetermined the outcome.

So you are both right and can stop fighting :D
mkint
#107 - 2017-01-08 13:41:10 UTC
Ugh, if salvos wasn't a condescending know-it-all, I might actually look for the point in his posts. But the truth is bad pilot = bad ship whatever he happens to be sitting in.

Most pilots don't look for the novel tactics in flying or fitting their ships. On a broad scale, with bell curves being what they are, yeah it can be said most pilots fly any given ship a certain way, and that way is more or less effective at certain things than other ships. That information happens to be useful for devs trying to achieve better balance. For a pilot wanting to fly the best he can, that's a ridiculous distraction. If you're going to learn to not suck, put in the time to figure it out. When you do, it won't really matter to you how "good" a ship is, what will matter is seeing what you can accomplish in it, and you will end up surprising yourself and being called names by people who suck.

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.

Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#108 - 2017-01-08 13:55:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Maekchu wrote:
I think both Remiel and Salvos are correct. The truth probably lies somewhere between both. Both piloting skills and stats will decide the outcomes of fights.

An example of a person who took the Rifter to another level was Crake Gaterau. During his time with The Black Rebel Rifter Club, he flew almost exclusively Rifters and made some very impressive killmails. This was even before the buff to the Rifters PWG. If you've done solo PvP, then you know that manual piloting and knowing different effective ranges of a module does make a difference on the outcome of a fight. An easy example would be a AB Blaster MSE Merlin vs a scram kiting Rifter. The Merlin has better stats, however the Merlin has a very short range on it's dps. If the Rifter then adjust his range to get outside of the Merlins blaster, he will still win even with less stats.

However, sometimes stats will determine the outcome no matter what you do. A simple, but not realistic example would be the Corvette vs Carrier. Someone mentioned that given enough time, the Corvette would kill the Carrier. That is incorrect, since the Corvette would never be able to break the passive tank of a Carrier. So no matter what, a SINGLE Corvette won't be able to break a Carrier, you need quite a few (But it can be done given enough).

A more realistic example and something more often encountered, is MWD kiter vs AB Brawler. Let us say you are in the AB brawling ship, then sometimes you may take a fight against a MWD kiter, because you hope they don't know how to negate a slingshot move. However, if the person is not completely nub and the agility of the MWD kiter is high enough, then it is basically impossible to slingshot. I'd consider, that here the stats predetermined the outcome.

So you are both right and can stop fighting :D


I actually don't disagree with this at all, and never did argue against it. My point was that a good pilot will make any ship good, and that no single factor is the all-encompassing, all-determining factor of all PVP encounters. My argument against Salvos is that the ships themselves aren't the be-all and end-all determining factor of PVP outcomes, and my example was a neuty Magnate vs Enyo, something I learned by dying to it, and then using it myself to kill a few active-tanked assault frigates. I also never stated that a bad pilot makes a ship bad. As a matter of fact, losing a fight doesn't make one bad, it just means you lost. The factors that determine whether or not you're bad are the same ones that determined why you lost. Everything is very situational, and a good pilot in a good ship can lose to a better pilot in a 'crap' ship.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Salvos Rhoska
#109 - 2017-01-08 14:50:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Remiel Pollard wrote:
My argument against Salvos is that the ships themselves aren't the be-all and end-all determining factor of PVP outcomes.


Nowhere have I said that.

Remiel Pollard wrote:
All you do is strawman and lie, and pretend you're bigger and better than you are, and then throw tantrums when you're challenged on it, and then sperge on about how everyone else is wrong and only you can ever be right. That is literally all you ever do.


Oh boy...
*holds up a mirror*

Maekchu wrote:
I think both Remiel and Salvos are correct. The truth probably lies somewhere between both. Both piloting skills and stats will decide the outcomes of fights.


I have said specifically that.

Ship stats are primary.
Player skill is secondary, and restricted by the above.
Both are involved, in that order.

Op wanted to discuss the balance of the rifters stats, not whether people are bad at flying them.

Ship balance is an issue separate from the skill of any one pilot flying them.
He wasnt asking " are rifter pilots bad", he was asking are rifters bad, as a ship.
Maekchu
Doomheim
#110 - 2017-01-08 15:40:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Maekchu
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

Ship stats are primary.
Player skill is secondary, and restricted by the above.
Both are involved, in that order.

And this is probably where the disagreement lies. I wouldn't say stats are primary and skills secondary. I wouldn't say either is more "important" then the other. Whether stats influence a fight more than piloting skills or vice versa, depends on the individual ships fighting. So in some instances piloting skills influence the fight more and in others ship stats will be more important.

To take the example of the Blaster Merlin and a scram kiting Rifter, then the Merlin have better stats than the Rifter in all areas except range control. So if ship stats are "primary", does that mean all stats are irrelevant except for range control? However, if the Rifter pilot is bad, then he might not know to pull range, wouldn't that make player skill "primary", since based on that condition the fight is then won by the Merlin with overall better stats?

As I see it, both are equally important factors and the individual ships in the fight determine what influences the outcome more.

So to take it back to the Rifter, then yes. In the context of solo frigate PvP, the Rifter does not have good stats compared to other ships, however it is still a decent scram kiter. It will win engagements vs most blaster setups or if you get a scram on a MWD kiter (piloting skill decides these fights), however it will have trouble vs stronger scram kiters (ex. Breachers or Tormentors) based on stats.

So in my opinion, one cannot look solely on ship stats to decide the strength of a ship. Both stats and how it is flown needs to be considered when balancing ships. It is basically the age old argument between EFT warriors and PvPers. If stats where the primary, then the dual rep incursus would be an insanely good ship. But people who actually PvP, know that it is just a brick that eventually will crumble, no matter how awesome it's tank and dps is.

So yeah, the Rifter might not have shiny stats, but in the hands of a decent pilot it can still do stuff. The fact that it is not an OP ship and requires you to learn engagement ranges, makes this a decent ship for people who wants to learn PvP.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#111 - 2017-01-08 15:48:01 UTC
Maekchu wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

Ship stats are primary.
Player skill is secondary, and restricted by the above.
Both are involved, in that order.

And this is probably where the disagreement lies. I wouldn't say stats are primary and skills secondary. I wouldn't say either is more "important" then the other. Whether stats influence a fight more than piloting skills or vice versa, depends on the individual ships fighting. So in some instances piloting skills influence the fight more and in others ship stats will be more important.

To take the example of the Blaster Merlin and a scram kiting Rifter, then the Merlin have better stats than the Rifter in all areas except range control. So if ship stats are "primary", does that mean all stats are irrelevant except for range control? However, if the Rifter pilot is bad, then he might not know to pull range, wouldn't that make player skill "primary", since based on that condition the fight is then won by the Merlin with overall better stats?

As I see it, both are equally important factors and the individual ships in the fight determine what influences the outcome more.

So to take it back to the Rifter, then yes. In the context of solo frigate PvP, the Rifter does not have good stats compared to other ships, however it is still a decent scram kiter. It will win engagements vs most blaster setups or if you get a scram on a MWD kiter (piloting skill decides these fights), however it will have trouble vs stronger scram kiters (ex. Breachers or Tormentors) based on stats.

So in my opinion, one cannot look solely on ship stats to decide the strength of a ship. Both stats and how it is flown needs to be considered when balancing ships. It is basically the age old argument between EFT warriors and PvPers. If stats where the primary, then the dual rep incursus would be an insanely good ship. But people who actually PvP, know that it is just a brick that eventually will crumble, no matter how awesome it's tank and dps is.

So yeah, the Rifter might not have shiny stats, but in the hands of a decent pilot it can still do stuff. The fact that it is not an OP ship and requires you to learn engagement ranges, makes this a decent ship for people who wants to learn PvP.


Actually, it's quite easy to demonstrate that the ship stats are secondary to a player's understanding of how to manipulate them, which falls directly into the category of skill.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Salvos Rhoska
#112 - 2017-01-08 15:55:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Maekchu:

I will explain, logically.

Ship stats are primary for the following reason:
-The ship has hardcoded stats and fitting restrictions.

The ship, and how you fit it, represents the vehicle in which you partake in EVE.
It a system of code with specific limitations.

No matter how good you are as a PvP pilot in EVE, you cannot overcome those hardcoded limitations of that specific ship.

Player aptitude is secondary for the following reason:
-All aspects of a players personal aptitude in PvP, are systemically limited by the ship they are flying.
-A proficient pilot can fly the same ship better, than a less proficient player. But its still the same ship.
-Both players are subject to the same limitations of the ship, as explained above.

No amount of skill can make a ship do something it cannot do.
But a "good" ship allows the same player to do things they cannot do in a "bad" ship.

If its easier to conceptualize, consider the following:
-Ships stats as the base of a pyramid, where it meets the EVE surface.
This is the fundamental widest base on which the rest builds.
-2nd tier of blocks in the pyramid could be how the ship is fit.
-3rd tier, the players dedicated SP to improve performance of the bottom two tiers.
-4th and further tiers of blocks would comprise the players personal experiential aptitude at PvP, such as situational awareness game/ship knowledge etc.

However, as I pointed out.
OPs point was to discuss whether the rifter is a bad ship, not whether rifter pilots are bad.
He is not talking about skill, he is talking about the ship itself.
Salvos Rhoska
#113 - 2017-01-08 16:15:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Actually, it's quite easy to demonstrate that the ship stats are secondary to a player's understanding of how to manipulate them, which falls directly into the category of skill.


Ships have stats.
Players have capability.
Player capability, is dependent on ship stats.
Ship stats are not dependent on player capability.

Ergo, ship stats are primary, player capability is secondary, as restricted by the former.

Even the most capable PvP pilot that EVE has ever seen, cannot exceed the mechanical restraints of his ship.
Hence, skill is secondary to the primacy of the ship stats. It is restricted by it.

Im surprised you seem incapable of understanding this basic logic.

OP wants to discuss whether rifters are bad as ships.
Not if they are flown badly by incapable players.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#114 - 2017-01-08 16:23:10 UTC
This guy still thinks he can tell PVP'ers how PVP works huh?

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Maekchu
Doomheim
#115 - 2017-01-08 16:27:09 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
No matter how good you are as a PvP pilot in EVE, you cannot overcome those hardcoded limitations of that specific ship.

Again, we are just in disagreement on this point. Your argument doesn't get better by repeating it in other words.

An instance of where pilot skills overcome hardcoded limitations would be a sniping Tornado vs a frigate. Obviously, stat wise the Tornado has the upper hand. But the frigate pilot can increase it's transversal using manual piloting when trying to get into range, on the other hand, the Tornado can equally reduce the transversal with manual piloting. But if you would look at those ships, without the consideration of piloting skills, the Tornado would obviously always win, unless you put the frigate right at 0 next to the tornado at the start of the fight. But then you would throw in variables that is not part of it's "hardcoded" limitations.

Anyway, I feel at this point it's just argument for the sake of argument, as many things tend to devolve to on these forums. So let's just say we have somewhat different opinions on the matter and that you have not presented a compelling enough argument to sway my opinion.
Salvos Rhoska
#116 - 2017-01-08 16:27:44 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
This guy still thinks he can tell PVP'ers how PVP works huh?


Appeal to authority.

No argument refuted.
Matter tabled.
Salvos Rhoska
#117 - 2017-01-08 16:28:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Maekchu wrote:
An instance of where pilot skills overcome hardcoded limitations would be a sniping Tornado vs a frigate.


No.

The pilots skills in your example did not overcome the hardcoded limitations.
They operated within the hardcoded limitations.

Maekchu wrote:
Anyway, I feel at this point it's just argument for the sake of argument, as many things tend to devolve to on these forums. So let's just say we have somewhat different opinions on the matter and that you have not presented a compelling enough argument to sway my opinion.


My sentiment exactly. I have attempted by means of various examples to explain what primary, secondary, hardcoded etc means, but you have your own views.

In anycase, as I have repeatedly stated, OPs question was whether rifters are bad ships, not whether they are flown by bad pilots.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#118 - 2017-01-08 16:31:03 UTC
Maekchu wrote:
Anyway, I feel at this point it's just argument for the sake of argument, as many things tend to devolve to when Salvos starts typing.


FTFY Blink

He's an obnoxious contrarian for its own sake, and has no idea what he's going on about. Don't even bother talking to him, just tell the newbs he lies to why he's wrong, give them examples, and hope they learn from experience instead of pretentious narcissism.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Salvos Rhoska
#119 - 2017-01-08 16:33:40 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Maekchu wrote:
Anyway, I feel at this point it's just argument for the sake of argument, as many things tend to devolve to when Salvos starts typing.


FTFY Blink

He's an obnoxious contrarian for its own sake, and has no idea what he's going on about. Don't even bother talking to him, just tell the newbs he lies to why he's wrong, give them examples, and hope they learn from experience instead of pretentious narcissism.


Misquoting and ad-hominem.
Mr Mieyli
Doomheim
#120 - 2017-01-08 16:35:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Mieyli
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Ships have stats.
Players have capability.
Player capability, is dependent on ship stats.
Ship stats are not dependent on player capability.

Ergo, ship stats are primary, player capability is secondary, as restricted by the former.

Even the most capable PvP pilot that EVE has ever seen, cannot exceed the mechanical restraints of his ship.
Hence, skill is secondary to the primacy of the ship stats. It is restricted by it.

Im surprised you seem incapable of understanding this basic logic.

OP wants to discuss whether rifters are bad as ships.
Not if they are flown badly by incapable players.


Arguing that a player can't make a ship do something it can't do is, well, obvious and simplistic. What can a ship do? CCP gives us a canvas in the fitting room a hull has, and a wide range of modules to put in those slots. This comes down to player choice as to how to fill his space. Now sure the stats limit player choice, of course they do, but the player can come up with clever ways to use those stats, and trade off one for another.

While the base stats might not depend on player skill, the proportion of the stats that are usable IS dependent on player skill. As others have already said, in certain fights one ship has better damage output, tank, speed, but it gets scrammed and can't track it's target. Now some of the stat advantages are negated. This is the point people are trying to get across to you, combat in eve is fluid with stats becoming more or less meaningful at different points in a fight. You can't simply argue 'stats are primary', without acknowledging that player skill influences the importance of the stats.

Edit: look up perfect imbalance and you can see that even in unbalanced games player skill is the deciding factor. Stats are what they are and everyone knows them. Arguing you lost because the other guys ship was better is a false way to view the situation, you lost because your plan dictated by your fit didn't work in this case.

This post brought to you by CCP's alpha forum alt initiative. Playing the eve forums has never come cheaper.