open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Tiericide
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7

Author Topic

Sheledra
Posted - 2011.02.23 05:33:00 - [151]
 

Ah yes the arbitrator is an exe lent ship indeed. And that is my point, I'm not saying there should be a tier system, i' saying there isn't one. It's just a player made concept that organizes ships by role. The difference in prices of the ships are due to the mass delusion that there is a tier system.

Yes different ships require different skills but that is just to let you know that the ship requires more or less skills to be effective. The "lower tier" ships aren't flown as often because the tec 2 versions of them are easy to train for and are considerably better. Most arbitrator pilots eventually want to fly a curse or pilgrim. On the other hand the tec 2 version of the maller provides nothing more than a few increased stats, and requires you to switch to a new set of weapons. Hence few people want to fly this ship.

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.02.23 05:50:00 - [152]
 

Originally by: Sheledra
Originally by: Val'Dore
I had a nice reply all ready to go, but I don't feel like doing it over again on my phone.

Short version:

Role has **** all to do with Tier. Period.



You keep saying it but offer nothing as proof. Maby the used to not be related but everything i have seen in the game indicates that they are more or less synonymous now. Show me one thing in the game that indicates otherwise. And no, no one cares about how things used to be.


Alright.

Because of Scorpion.

Originally by: Mikalya
Originally by: Sheledra

Arbitrator


And this ship is a PERFECT example of what the entire Tier concept should be abandoned.

The Arbitrator is a GOOD ship, regardless of its tier. Why? Because it fits its "Role" perfectly. In comparison, the Maller HAS no role it fits but is a higher tier. Consequently, it is doomed to be a crappy ship that is expensive simply because it is a higher tier, NOT because of actual functionality. I know it might seem odd to you but failure of a higher tier ship to perform isn't a reason the tiers should exist, quite the opposite.

Ships should be balanced, slotted and bonused by their ROLE as viewed by their faction, not because of an arbitrary tier system.


See? Someone gets it.

Mikalya
Amarr
Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers
The 0rphanage
Posted - 2011.02.23 05:53:00 - [153]
 

Originally by: Val'Dore

See? Someone gets it.

Unfortunately I was arguing this same thing 5 years ago with my first character....

Doomed, I tell you. Doomed Razz

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.02.23 06:02:00 - [154]
 

Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja
This is where I repeated myself in saying that the build costs are not arbitrary (ie based purely on tier), which was entirely on-topic.


Build costs are based on tier. Tier 1 are cheap to build, tier 2 a little less so, and tier 3 are the most expensive. You can't deny that is universally true, across the board.

Quote:
Here is where you repeated yourself by claiming that build costs are purely based on tier, ignoring my request to extrapolate on why you feel the tier system alone causes their prices to be the only determining factor, and thus abritrary. This was the first time you ignored me regarding something that was entirely on topic.


What else is responsible? All of the evidence points to the tier system.

Quote:
This is where I gave you the basic version of the same argument I had to repeat time and again with regards to how the sum of a ship's components (such as its defensive systems, its crews' range of skills, its propulsion systems, its hull construction, its electronics systems, its power backbone, etc etc etc) is what determines the total build-cost of the ships.


All of which is conjecture. You have no evidence of any of that being a factor. All of the evidence points to the tier system.

Quote:
If stats and slots were the sole factors determining who ever used which ships, then nobody would ever use any other ship than the Rokh, Abaddon, Maelstrom or Megathron (and I'm only saying Mega here since you seem to have a particular dislike for the Hyperion).


I have stated no opinion on the Hyperion. It is a quaint ship. But your statement begs the question, how do you explain why all BSes so clearly follow a tiering system, yet for the most part only have one role and yet have such cost difference?

Quote:
And yet, people are using 'crap-tier' ships every day in EVE, you just don't see them using them so you assume they don't. You don't see them at the top of economical reports, citing this as some kind of magical link between tier and usefulness, arbitrarily and indirectly rendering 'lower tier, and thus less useful ships worse for a role'.


I have not made any specific claims about the usefulness of a given ship to the general population. I know pvp, that is what I speak to.

Quote:
This is where I specifically addressed your points again, stating you want the tier system removed (fixed) for no other reason than "nobody uses these because they are tier x", which has to do with the block of text just preceeding this one.


That was never my argument. My argument is that no ship in EvE should be balanced, statted, slotted, or bonuses entirely due to its tier. If you want to argue against it, I won't stop you. you can start whenever you like.

Quote:
I go on to give very basic examples of why I think your assumption is incorrect, and begin calling you biased in that you ignore those ships on the basis of not finding them worth your while, regardless of how useful they might be to people other than yourself, even in their current forms.


You assumptions are not my problem.

Quote:
...it gives brand new players a brief waiting period during which they might learn to start taking into consideration ships' various attributes and bonuses in conjunction with their cost;


So you support lowering the prices of tech 1 ships across the board.

Quote:
I additionally addressed your claim that the tier system is solely responsible for rendering ships of a lower tier 'obsolete' in every way, shape and form,


All of the ships that are obsolete, are so because of two things: Their tier and their stats. Guess how those are related.

Quote:
and again address your claim of tier being the sole factor in ship costs, again highlighting that the ship's systems complexity, or the sum of the cost of its components, does.


I didn't claim anything, I stated undisputed fact. Anyone with an eye and a brain can tell you the same thing I did.

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.02.23 06:13:00 - [155]
 

Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja
...they add to the cost of the vehicle - these are factors you don't see from the outside of your ship, but they're still there and are still having an impact on the ship's cost.


The very definition of arbitrary.

Quote:
I also highlight how you are essentially improving a vehicle license for these ships with CONCORD, which is something you believe has nothing at all to do with this.


Regardless of my 'belief', CONCORD is irrelevant to this.

Quote:
I am fairly certain that I have read somewhere through the chronicles available on th EVE site that CONCORD are the regulating body that decide which ship designs are allowed to be used by civilians and capsuleers (NPCs and players), and which aren't. Even some ship descriptions carry traces of this.


How do you explain this for lawless space?

Quote:
(roles - I can't use a ship for its tier, that would just be daft, because I'm going to get very little done trying to mine in a Rupture vs a Scythe).


Why not? Your entire platform is based on the idea that roles and tiers are inexorably linked. Is it or isn't it?

Quote:
Does this mean that it's fine for you to talk about roles, but not for me to talk about them? Looks like it to me.


When you try to link roles to tiers, you are making a fallacious argument since they are not related. Discussing roles is fine until you use it to make a silly argument.

Quote:
They can achieve similar buffers and resists, where the Ferox is able to achieve its damage at long ranges uses what is refered to as 'direct damage'; you don't snipe with missiles because they have travel time, making 'alpha strikes' extremely difficult to control.


The Drake is superior in every way in strict stat terms. The Ferox is only relevant because it is a gunship and because, it being a tier 1 BC, it is a lot less expensive to build.

Quote:
Their DPS? Superior to that of a Drake.


Show me.

Quote:
How? Because with turrets, assuming you are tracking the target fine and its signature radius is equal to or greater than your turrets' signature resolution, you are going to get an average of 1.5x in hit-types, a factor that missiles do not have. ~250dps * 1.5 = 375dps. This can be achieved at roughly 74km assuming you have someone tracking linking you from behind, such as someone in a Scythe, a Scimitar or an Oneiros.


You are claiming that railguns in a sniping setup on a Ferox will do almost 400 dps?

Quote:
This is the kind of concept that has Templar Dane fall out of the boat; he is adamant that all ships should be able to be brawlers and be entirely competent in 1vs1. He does not say it in so many words, but instead says it with the summary of every one of his posts, particularly where he ignores points made regarding ships' designs placing them far away from the action, not in the middle of it.


I have no problem with ships having roles, but I have a problem with them being gimped due to tiers.

Originally by: "Val'Dore"
Why not? They are the same class of ship and there is no timeline based obsolescence occurring. As in ships are not replacing them for their role.


This is where you believe ships within a class should have equivalent pricing. I can guarantee you that if, as an example, the Abaddon and Armageddon had to be priced the same, we would only ever see Abaddons in the field.


Armageddon is superior in a great many scenarios. Infact, the only thing the Abaddon has over it is raw ehp, alpha, and the 4th midslot (which mandates a hvy injector, so it doesnt actually have an extra midslot). And better stats due to tiering.

AnonyTerrorNinja
Minmatar
Atomic Geese
Posted - 2011.02.23 06:20:00 - [156]
 

True, which is why I made no effort to defend the Scythe beyond its tracking link capability and mining :P

3-low ships like it are able to fit 'reasonable' armor buffers though, at the very least, allowing them to be used in conjunction with remote repair to better maintain their survivability. They aren't well suited to extremely small gangs where remote repair might be limited or non-existent, though...

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.02.23 06:24:00 - [157]
 

Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja
Similarly, we would see Blaster Rokhs taking over all focus among the Caldari lineup, possibly even stealing thunder from Gallente, as the cost barrier between a Rokh and a Megathron is suddenly destroyed, meaning that players are able to get that range they've so longed for whilst also getting a great tank as far as remote repair is concerned, yet again.


Why haven't they done so already? I mean besides the Mega doing more damage and having better tracking.

Quote:
Does this mean that 'eliminating the tier-based costs' is a good thing? No. It means that you are now doing nothing but rendering ships obsolete by removing a factor that had a large role to play in their usage; cost. Cost is measured against effectiveness for a specific role, and cost-effectiveness is a massive part of any player's choice as to what ship to use for any specific purpose.


Of course cost is a factor, but ships being too homogenous is also a problem that cost has no business 'fixing'. A ship shouldn't be more expensive than another ship, just so the cheaper ship is used.

Quote:
That is to say, currently, it costs exacttly the same to fit an Invulnerability Field II to a cruiser or battlecruiser as it does to a Battleship, despite the fact that the Battleship has that much larger an area that needs to be covered in order for the field to do its job.


I really have no idea where this is going.

Quote:
Originally by: "Val'Dore"
Balance is not always about the obvious, sometimes it is subtle. And if differentiating combat from mining ship is so gorram important... why are there not civilian parallels to the combat ship skills?


There are. They exist in the forum of ore processing skills, refining skills, research skills, manufacturing skills, the skills required to get into a Freighter or Jump Freighter, or into an exhumer, mining barge, the Orca or a Rorqual.


Not what I was referring to. Why are 'civilian' Frigates (Frigates are warships btw) not requiring civilian frigate skills? Why are the non combat frigs and cruisers stuck in combat tiers?

Quote:
From there it just dilutes into what I addressed in my post yesterday, namely you becoming nothing but arrogant, snide and doing little to nothing to support discussion of your own thread's topic.


When you continue to make the same arguments over and over again, people tend to stop bothering to form the same replies over and over again.

Tiers and Roles are completely unrelated. Argue against removing tiers and stfu about roles. Or just stfu entirely.

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.02.23 06:28:00 - [158]
 

Originally by: Sheledra
Ah yes the arbitrator is an exe lent ship indeed. And that is my point, I'm not saying there should be a tier system, i' saying there isn't one.


Which is just ignorant. It is there plain as day. Skill reqs, mineral reqs, stats, slots, it all speaks to a tier system.

Quote:
It's just a player made concept that organizes ships by role. The difference in prices of the ships are due to the mass delusion that there is a tier system.


Buy the entire line of Caldari cruiser bpos. Then tell us you still believe that.

Quote:
Yes different ships require different skills but that is just to let you know that the ship requires more or less skills to be effective.


We don't a tier system to tell us that, the mere suggestion is an insult to our intelligence.

Quote:
The "lower tier" ships aren't flown as often because the tec 2 versions of them are easy to train for and are considerably better.


No harder to train for then the T2 versions of the tier 3s.

Quote:
Most arbitrator pilots eventually want to fly a curse or pilgrim. On the other hand the tec 2 version of the maller provides nothing more than a few increased stats, and requires you to switch to a new set of weapons. Hence few people want to fly this ship.


Amarr T2 issues aren't really related to this thread.

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.02.23 06:32:00 - [159]
 

Originally by: Mikalya
Originally by: Val'Dore

See? Someone gets it.

Unfortunately I was arguing this same thing 5 years ago with my first character....

Doomed, I tell you. Doomed Razz


I have the same nine megathreads every character... lol. Tiers, sov, local... bleh.

AnonyTerrorNinja
Minmatar
Atomic Geese
Posted - 2011.02.23 07:01:00 - [160]
 

Originally by: "Val'Dore"
The very definition of arbitrary.


Using wood vs using a polymer of some sort that you simply place a veneer over is significantly more expensive, especially as the wood requires special treatment to ensure its durability whereas the veneer simply gets a few layers of enamel.


Originally by: "Val'Dore"
Regardless of my 'belief', CONCORD is irrelevant to this.

-

How do you explain this for lawless space?



Where do the blueprints for normal and faction ships come from? Where do the blueprints for Pirate ships come from?


Originally by: "Val'Dore"
Why not? Your entire platform is based on the idea that roles and tiers are inexorably linked. Is it or isn't it?


Then why can't I use a Stabber for effective tank, gank and target painting simultaneously? Why can't I use a Moa for effective ECM, sniping and tanking simultaneously? Why can't I use a Thorax for effective remote repair, gank and tank simultaneously? Why can't I use an Maller for effective tracking disruption, gank and tank simultaneously?

Because I am trying to do with a single ship among a class what three different ships are designed to do within a role unique to each, with a supposed 'tier' system being the sole factor separating them when one looks at their cost, attributes and fitting capabilities (slots and pg/cpu), regardless of the fact that tradeoffs in components exist for the purpose of making any one other factor possible.

If ships such as the Rupture were designed to also be able to be significantly faster than they are now and to allow for even remotely effective target painting in addition to their quality of being the pit-brawler of the class and race, then we would see an additional low-slot for a nanofiber (maybe even two) as well as a fourth mid-slot to fit a painter in addition to the MWD/AB, web and WD/WS that is commonly attributed to the type of ship it currently is.

Unfortunately, the moment you give it that extra low-slot and mid-slot, you are opening up the potential for it to be used as yet another shield-buffered nano-ship; to counterbalance this you have to reduce other attributes to keep it in line with the rest of its class, within that race specifically.

Then in order to bring the other ships up from their currently inferior position, as believed by players like you and Templar Dane, you would have to provide significant boosts to their attributes and/or increase their slots; doing this on a Stabber on its low-slot would allow too easily for someone to fit very high resists in addition to a 1600mm plate, affording it a far greater buffer than it can currently achieve when it comes to remote repair, which could cause a severe disparity as far as tackling roles are concerned, namely in the fact that it would supercede a Rupture for the role of close-ranged brawling, even if it does trade off DPS to achieve this.

Similarly, giving a Bellicose that extra low would make its close-ranged survivability far too great considering that it is designed to be a ship kept at high distances, providing support for the rest of its fleet.

Again, as I stated earlier, I won't defend the Scythe's current attributes nor fitting capabilities as even I feel that they are sub-par across all of the races, rendering their usability extremely low for virtually any scenario.

Similarly for the Gallente or Caldari, if you cause the Exequror or Osprey's survivability to be too high, you will end up with stalemate situations as exist currently when fleets have too much remote repair going with normal logistics; unless ECM or significant neuting comes into play, nobody can kill anyone else because the logistics are surviving too well and they are keeping people alive too well, which further increases blobbing problems.

AnonyTerrorNinja
Minmatar
Atomic Geese
Posted - 2011.02.23 07:03:00 - [161]
 

Currently, if people know that their opponents are going to use 'crappy tier 1 cruisers for logistics', they don't think anything of it and they will continue fighting regardless; the moment those ships get replaced by their Tech2 counterparts, people immediately start groaning and often opt to not fight or simply increase the size of their blobs to counteract this. As such, buffing up the tech1 logistics too much can ultimately end up being nothing but a bad thing. Technically, overly-survivable Tech2 logistics on its own is already a bad thing, but their significant cost acts to counter-balance this to a degree.


Originally by: "Val'Dore"
When you try to link roles to tiers, you are making a fallacious argument since they are not related. Discussing roles is fine until you use it to make a silly argument.



I have addressed this quite a few times already.


Originally by: "Val'Dore"
You are claiming that railguns in a sniping setup on a Ferox will do almost 400 dps?


Yes, and this at 74km or so ranges. Obviously, this assumes lvl5 skills, but then this is when compared against an equally skilled Drake.

At closer ranges, should the player opt to use blasters or use Javelin on a rail platform, it can out-dps a Drake entirely.

This is a matter of 500dps before hittypes, or 750dps+ after, vs 500dps or so linear or worse for Terror Rage missiles. Either ship can pack the same drones in, so drones are ignored for the purpose of comparison.

The tradeoffs made in this case amount to needing capacitor to use your weapons, having to get significantly closer to your targets and having a slightly smaller buffer, though at comparible resists.



Originally by: "Val'Dore"
I have no problem with ships having roles, but I have a problem with them being gimped due to tiers.


Then your opening post should have been rephrased, as for the bulk of this thread, you have expressed having a problem with how the 'lower tier ships' are inferior in every way to their 'higher tier ships' within their class and race. To an extent, I may be able to agree with such sentiments, but only provided one takes into account all factors surrounding the uses of the ships and comparison of how their roles determine where in a fight they should be located (both in terms of distance from the bulk of the firepower and their survivability irrespective of their location).

DPS and tackle, as is Templar's concern, should not be the only factors that a ship should be able to excel in regardless of its fittings that makes it worth using or not worth using. EVE does not revolve around fights consisting of only these qualities, or at the very least, does not require that every single ship should be able to put points and webs on every single target ever encountered in the enemy's fleet.



With regards to the Abaddon vs Armageddon, I would rather argue that its midslots would be used for things such as ECCM, sensor boosters or tracking computers, seeing as the former two are seldom if ever covered by fleetmates and the last is virtually never done, owing to people wanting the most survivability possible on their Oneiros or Scimitar (or Scythe for Tech1).

This was one of the places where I felt Templar demonstrated a distinct lack of knowledge; in a fleet, even if you have dual capacitor injectors, it won't always save you from being neuted into oblivion, and even remote cap transfers won't save you in that regard.
Where I was specifically talking about using remote cap on ships that have the bonuses for it, namely Augorors or Guardians, he decided to rather talk baout daisy-chaining of cap transfers.

An Abaddon, as an example, can last quite a while in a realistic fight without needing any cap boosters, if it's using a buffer instead of a local tank. When its capacitor runs out, it isn't impossible for it to broadcast that it needs cap.

AnonyTerrorNinja
Minmatar
Atomic Geese
Posted - 2011.02.23 07:06:00 - [162]
 

Some of my most successful small-scale fleets in empire have consisted of a combination of Basilisks, Dominixen and simple Bellicoses; The Bellicose would be the first to lock and would paint up our targets for us, making them quicker to lock for the Dominixen. Afterward, the drones and turrets on our ships, tracking permitting, would be able to better hit those targets, affording us a better averaged DPS potential than if the targets weren't being painted for us. This was especially true in any case where our opponents would bring an ewar boat and park it at 80km off, where we'd have to use sentry drones - because Sentry drones have a signature resolution for their guns of 400m, which I'm sure you can imagine is terrible against a ship with a signature between 100m and 200m.



Templar Dane, that is why tracking and signature radius have nothing to do with eachother. Even if you webbed down an interceptor with a signature radius of 25m to 0m/s somehow, missiles with an explosion radius of 175m+ (read: heavy missiles and up) are going to do extremely poorly against it. Similarly, turrets with a resolution of 125m and up (read: cruiser sized weapons and up) are going to have lower averaged hit-types due to the shotgun vs pingpongball effect.

Just because you can still do enough damage in that one shot to take out an interceptor does not mean that it isn't still a valid factor for any other ship that might have a small signature radius, such as Logistics ships with gang linking.


In this way, all the tracking in the world mean nothing to you if your target is too small for your shotgun to hit effectively.



Originally by: "Val'Dore"
When you continue to make the same arguments over and over again, people tend to stop bothering to form the same replies over and over again.

Tiers and Roles are completely unrelated. Argue against removing tiers and stfu about roles. Or just stfu entirely.


At first I was planning on thanking you for taking the time to actually start discussing points, but then you just reverted to being rude...

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.02.23 09:01:00 - [163]
 

Originally by: Mikalya
...Doomed, I tell you. Doomed Razz

Early onset BitterVet Syndrome™ for the Win! Razz

mkmin
Posted - 2011.02.23 09:32:00 - [164]
 

Started a post about somebody with a solution looking for a problem, but then I think I realized this is a troll topic. Here's an idea to "fix" your problem... remove every ship from the game but rookie ships. Then your vision of a bland video game may come to pass. I mean seriously, wtf? Really? Rename the thread "proposal to waste years of development time on something that will break the game and serve no purpose." I think a dev said it takes months to get a single ship balanced. And you wanna completely rebalance about 50 of them? Bad idea is bad.

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.02.23 13:12:00 - [165]
 

Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja
Using wood vs using a polymer of some sort that you simply place a veneer over is significantly more expensive, especially as the wood requires special treatment to ensure its durability whereas the veneer simply gets a few layers of enamel.


Unless you can interact with those 'details', they are arbitrary. You aren't supporting your platform with that direction.

Quote:
Where do the blueprints for normal and faction ships come from? Where do the blueprints for Pirate ships come from?


Faction stations. The pirates themselves. CONCORD is doing what exactly?

Quote:
Then why can't I use a Stabber for effective tank, gank and target painting simultaneously?


It can't do any of those effectively. Never mind all of them.

Quote:
Why can't I use a Moa for effective ECM, sniping and tanking simultaneously? Why can't I use a Thorax for effective remote repair, gank and tank simultaneously? Why can't I use an Maller for effective tracking disruption, gank and tank simultaneously?


If you are getting at that tiers and roles are not related, you might not be as dense as I thought.

Quote:
Off topic garbage about roles.


I really do not understand why you are so Quixotic about this role business. Nothing here suggested by me does anything to change a ship's role. You have yet to address the topic of this thread and instead are constantly going on and on about roles... are you just trolling or is this nonsense going to continue?

Quote:
Then in order to bring the other ships up from their currently inferior position, as believed by players like you and Templar Dane, you would have to provide significant boosts to their attributes and/or increase their slots;


You make it sound like a bad thing.

Quote:
doing this on a Stabber on its low-slot would allow too easily for someone to fit very high resists in addition to a 1600mm plate,


Stabber... 1600mm plate? What kind of ****** does that? The Stabber's role is speed. I would have thought you, of all people, would know that.

Quote:
affording it a far greater buffer than it can currently achieve when it comes to remote repair,


RR a Stabber, that's rich.

Quote:
which could cause a severe disparity as far as tackling roles are concerned, namely in the fact that it would supercede a Rupture for the role of close-ranged brawling, even if it does trade off DPS to achieve this.


I don't see how the Stabber could compete with the Rupture in that category. Maybe a lolfit... or if you deliberately made it into a faster Rupture instead of keeping it to its role.

Quote:
Similarly, giving a Bellicose that extra low would make its close-ranged survivability far too great considering that it is designed to be a ship kept at high distances, providing support for the rest of its fleet.


The Bellicose is not safe at any range it is useful in. An 'extra' low might change that.

Quote:
Again, as I stated earlier, I won't defend the Scythe's current attributes nor fitting capabilities as even I feel that they are sub-par across all of the races, rendering their usability extremely low for virtually any scenario.


Nope, the Scythe's role is to be a flying insurance payout, we can't allow a tier 1 ship to survive an encounter with anything but another wet paper bag.

Quote:
if you cause the Exequror or Osprey's survivability to be too high, you will end up with stalemate situations as exist currently when fleets have too much remote repair going with normal logistics;


RR needs to be looked at regardless of what happens with tiers.

Quote:
unless ECM or significant neuting comes into play,


As if it won't.

Quote:
nobody can kill anyone else because the logistics are surviving too well and they are keeping people alive too well, which further increases blobbing problems.


Tech 2 problem. RR problem. Role problem. Damage vs Tank Disparity problem. NOT a tier problem.

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.02.23 13:16:00 - [166]
 

Originally by: mkmin
Started a post about somebody with a solution looking for a problem, but then I think I realized this is a troll topic.


There are trolls here, but the topic isn't a troll.

Quote:
Here's an idea to "fix" your problem... remove every ship from the game but rookie ships.


What a silly idea.

Quote:
Then your vision of a bland video game may come to pass.


I don't envision a bland video game... EvE is already a bland video game in a lot of respects. Having half the ships in it barely or never used is certainly not helping it taste any less bland.

Quote:
I mean seriously, wtf? Really? Rename the thread "proposal to waste years of development time on something that will break the game and serve no purpose." I think a dev said it takes months to get a single ship balanced. And you wanna completely rebalance about 50 of them? Bad idea is bad.


Oh, so CCP doing their job and improving the game is a bad idea. I think I found another troll.

Mikalya
Amarr
Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers
The 0rphanage
Posted - 2011.02.23 14:07:00 - [167]
 

Originally by: Val'Dore

Nope, the Scythe's role is to be a flying insurance payout, we can't allow a tier 1 ship to survive an encounter with anything but another wet paper bag.


Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

AnonyTerrorNinja
Minmatar
Atomic Geese
Posted - 2011.02.23 14:09:00 - [168]
 

Originally by: "Val'Dore"

Stabber... 1600mm plate? What kind of ****** does that? The Stabber's role is speed. I would have thought you, of all people, would know that.


What kind of idiot puts a shield buffer on a Hurricane with nanos in its lows, even though it only has four mids, of which one is inevitably used to fit a Warp Disruptor?

The kind of idiot that has a clue as to how to fit and effectively use ships. Fitting a 1600mm plate onto a Stabber doesn't hurt its MWDing speed so significantly that it becomes useless as far as that aspect of the ship's use is concerned, and using 200mm Autos to make up the lack of PG doesn't hurt its DPS as significantly as one would think. If the opposite were true, there wouldn't be so many people using exactly the kind of fit I am talking about, already.

At this point, I feel that your knowledge is effectively on par with Templar's. You don't truly have as broad a knowledgebase as you believe you do regarding the ships in the game nor how to fit or use them effectively, which creates an automatic bias regarding how you feel about ships, since on paper, they look bad to you no matter how you weigh them up.


Originally by: "Val'Dore"
RR a Stabber, that's rich.


This only serves to further demonstrate my point.

Originally by: "Val'Dore"
The Bellicose is not safe at any range it is useful in. An 'extra' low might change that.


While this has me thinking that you and Templar Dane might essentially be the same person, simply using alts, which would explain why you don't address anything said by him, but will address any other poster's comments regarding this.

http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1469347&page=5#128

This post of his is the only one you have responded to in any way throughout the entire thread, which is surprisingly enough also a supportive post to help you label me as the troll of the thread.

Perhaps mkmin is correct, perhaps this is nothing but a troll thread. By being at troll thread you don't need to address any points, because doing so would actually make the thread be useful; instead you can simply do what you can to avoid addressing the thread topic.

So I guess I'll be done with this one then. Templar Dane, after his posts, proved that he didn't know what he was talking about, worse than I might not know what I'm talking about as far as you are concerned, Val'Dore. You haven't done anything to address the thread topic properly through 6 pages, I have done what I could to address it and thereafter, when things turned into a roles discussion (at your hand, mind you), you were adamant in your position of not addressing any of your own statements or rebuttals to what limited statements you did make.

Templar Dane
Amarr
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2011.02.23 15:02:00 - [169]
 

Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja

http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1469347&page=1#21
And this is where you begin with your snippets-posting, beginning your apathetic arroange trip. You are, yourself, discussing ships' roles here, not their tiers, because you want to know if I have ever used any of these ships and for what (roles - I can't use a ship for its tier, that would just be daft, because I'm going to get very little done trying to mine in a Rupture vs a Scythe).



Every ship in this game was designed to do something. That something is it's "intended role". The logi cruisers have "role bonuses". Nobody has argued that the logi cruisers(except the aug) aren't doing well in their intended role, yet you keep bringing it up as your one and only example of the tier system working as it should.





Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja

They can achieve similar buffers and resists, where the Ferox is able to achieve its damage at long ranges uses what is refered to as 'direct damage'; you don't snipe with missiles because they have travel time, making 'alpha strikes' extremely difficult to control.

Their DPS? Superior to that of a Drake. How? Because with turrets, assuming you are tracking the target fine and its signature radius is equal to or greater than your turrets' signature resolution, you are going to get an average of 1.5x in hit-types, a factor that missiles do not have. ~250dps * 1.5 = 375dps. This can be achieved at roughly 74km assuming you have someone tracking linking you from behind, such as someone in a Scythe, a Scimitar or an Oneiros.



You apparently have never compared a ferox to a drake if you think the ferox has anything on the drake at all. A HML drake will outdamage an ion blaster fitted ferox every time, and have more buffer(even if the drake fits full tackle and the ferox only fits a scram). The drake also needn't worry about tracking or range, or even cap....while the ferox lives and dies by those three issues.

Also, are you aware that a properly setup VEXOR with sentries will outdamage a sniping ferox at all ranges except over 100km?

Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja

This is the kind of concept that has Templar Dane fall out of the boat; he is adamant that all ships should be able to be brawlers and be entirely competent in 1vs1. He does not say it in so many words, but instead says it with the summary of every one of his posts, particularly where he ignores points made regarding ships' designs placing them far away from the action, not in the middle of it.



If your ship is worthless without it's wingmate, what happens if you get separated or the other gets blown up? Two ruptures will walk all over a caracal + rr osprey and not lose a ship.

Pilots are too valuable to have them in sub-par ships.

Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja

This is where you believe ships within a class should have equivalent pricing. I can guarantee you that if, as an example, the Abaddon and Armageddon had to be priced the same, we would only ever see Abaddons in the field.


Hey, if they buffed the fittings on all the lower tier ships allowing a geddon to fit mega pulse and all tech 2 like the abaddon, I'd sure as hell still fly it. But as all the more intelligent people in this thread know, the battleships are all fine(well, the hyperion is ****). This thread is about the cruisers, frigates and tier 1 battlecruisers.

Templar Dane
Amarr
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2011.02.23 15:12:00 - [170]
 

Originally by: Sheledra
Ah yes the arbitrator is an exe lent ship indeed. And that is my point, I'm not saying there should be a tier system, i' saying there isn't one. It's just a player made concept that organizes ships by role. The difference in prices of the ships are due to the mass delusion that there is a tier system.

Yes different ships require different skills but that is just to let you know that the ship requires more or less skills to be effective. The "lower tier" ships aren't flown as often because the tec 2 versions of them are easy to train for and are considerably better. Most arbitrator pilots eventually want to fly a curse or pilgrim. On the other hand the tec 2 version of the maller provides nothing more than a few increased stats, and requires you to switch to a new set of weapons. Hence few people want to fly this ship.


If you don't know what you're talking about, like another person currently in this thread, don't post.

While ccp never officially said that the tech 1 ships are divided into tiers, it's very easy to see. The lower in tier you go, the less raw hp/slots/etc those ships have except for the battleship class which has the same slots but differing stats otherwise.

Templar Dane
Amarr
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2011.02.23 15:24:00 - [171]
 

Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja
Templar Dane, after his posts, proved that he didn't know what he was talking about, worse than I might not know what I'm talking about as far as you are concerned, Val'Dore. You haven't done anything to address the thread topic properly through 6 pages, I have done what I could to address it and thereafter, when things turned into a roles discussion (at your hand, mind you), you were adamant in your position of not addressing any of your own statements or rebuttals to what limited statements you did make.



Show me the proof that I don't know what I'm talking about. Pics or it didn't happen.

UMAD because I actually taught you something about tracking?

E man Industries
Posted - 2011.02.23 15:41:00 - [172]
 

Agree with the tier system disapearing..don't mind some frigates requiring the frigate skill to 3 to use.

AnonyTerrorNinja
Minmatar
Atomic Geese
Posted - 2011.02.23 19:23:00 - [173]
 

I have no need to show you what you have shown the world, Templar.

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.02.23 19:52:00 - [174]
 

Edited by: Val''Dore on 23/02/2011 19:52:37
Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja
I have no need to show you what you have shown the world, Templar.


He is correct about how turrets work. Tracking speed, signature radius, optimal, falloff, and angular velocity all matter in whether a turret will track a target or not.

There is a reason a frig with an mwd on is far easier to hit when webbed than one that is scrammed.

AnonyTerrorNinja
Minmatar
Atomic Geese
Posted - 2011.02.23 20:34:00 - [175]
 

Edited by: AnonyTerrorNinja on 23/02/2011 20:36:11
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1469347&page=5#126

Originally by: "AnonyTerrorNinja"
In this way, all the tracking in the world mean nothing to you if your target is too small for your shotgun to hit effectively.


I suggest you go further back into the posts between Templar Dane and myself to see exactly what I was correcting him on.

Templar Dane
Amarr
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2011.02.23 21:54:00 - [176]
 

Edited by: Templar Dane on 23/02/2011 22:07:34
Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja
Edited by: AnonyTerrorNinja on 23/02/2011 20:36:11
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1469347&page=5#126

Originally by: "AnonyTerrorNinja"
In this way, all the tracking in the world mean nothing to you if your target is too small for your shotgun to hit effectively.


I suggest you go further back into the posts between Templar Dane and myself to see exactly what I was correcting him on.


You must be a troll, there is no way that someone as ignorant as you would keep coming back.

Oh, and cap injectors ARE midslot modules, you dolt. For the low low price of a midslot, some grid, and your cargohold you can eliminate the stupid cap transfer ship you wanted to bring for another ship that actually does something useful.

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.02.25 03:02:00 - [177]
 

Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja
Edited by: AnonyTerrorNinja on 23/02/2011 20:36:11
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1469347&page=5#126

Originally by: "AnonyTerrorNinja"
In this way, all the tracking in the world mean nothing to you if your target is too small for your shotgun to hit effectively.


I suggest you go further back into the posts between Templar Dane and myself to see exactly what I was correcting him on.


/facepalm

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.02.25 12:03:00 - [178]
 

Originally by: E man Industries
Agree with the tier system disapearing..don't mind some frigates requiring the frigate skill to 3 to use.


What is the point of it though? Now I understand the concept of more complex should equal more training, but I don't really think that matters enough.

So what harm would come from Rifters being able to be piloted with only Min Frig Uno? Obviously the stats won't be as high, but that is common sense. Extend it upward to cruisers, BCs, and BSes. Is there a good reason to not make them all require only level one of their respective skill? What is lost compared to what is gained?

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.03.02 08:13:00 - [179]
 

There should be more discussion about this... or is it time to go get trolled in the Assembly Hall?

Marchocias
Posted - 2011.03.02 19:49:00 - [180]
 

Personally, I'm with Val'Dore on this one... I think its a bit a of a shame that with so many ships in the game, there are only a handful which are of any relevance, and by removing tiers and balancing all ships in a class out could add much more variety.

Regarding the points in question:

1) I agree... its especially odd that some ships get a bonus from skills which they require at level 5 to even fly... there is no way to get less than a full caldari cruiser bonus on t2 caldari cruisers, for example. Why give them a bonus based on that skill at all? Why not just hardwire it at max, and save a tiny bit of time?

2) I disagree... when the balancing is done, I think they ought to end up with approxiately equal material costs, which should then be tweaked a few months later based upon popularity in the market, so that the less popular are made cheaper to make.

3) I'm not so sure... I would still like to see big variations... just fairer variations.

4) Again, I'm not so sure... it would be unsatisfactory if every race had an almost identical array of frigates, so that every race has an even divide between shield and armour tanking, for example.

5) I dunno... I think that the current "roles" that the less used ships have can still be retained much the same. For example, the cruisers with mining bonuses could still keep them, but be buffed up to be effective in combat at the same time. It'd be great if there were potential fits for a mining cruiser which could hold its own in PvP but also pull in a significant fraction of the what the hulk is able.

6) As stated, I think the roles they are supposed to serve are already pretty good... I just think they need to be buffed up a bit in order to actually serve those purposes effectively.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only