Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Zyella Stormborn
Alpha Strategy In Umbra Mortis
141
|
Posted - 2012.10.10 22:46:00 -
[241] - Quote
So you want your semi-afk char (you only move it occasionally if you think you are being probed, or hide it in pos) alt to affect the entire active player fleet or the other chars. I don't see it. If you can run 2-4 chars in pvp on field vs people active at keyboard, I salute you. But having it off somewhere else in the system yet affecting the battle from there should not be.
Put em on the field. Saying you have training in the char does not mean anything, as the character is still viable, the time was not wasted. You just may have to put them on grid now.
I truly hope they do this. ;) |
psycho freak
Snuff Box
15
|
Posted - 2012.10.10 23:07:00 -
[242] - Quote
if its cloaky t3 ogb il use as scout so it plays two roles also yes i run 2x pvp toons and ogb if im on my own if with corp i dont bother as there are enough of us to take up the roles of fleet
All over losec iv had ppl try probe me if i make mistake or return to old bm thats been busted by locals im dead
But hey who cares its getting nurfed like allways we will adapt |
Zyella Stormborn
Alpha Strategy In Umbra Mortis
141
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 00:42:00 -
[243] - Quote
psycho freak wrote: *snip*
But hey who cares its getting nurfed like allways we will adapt
I salute you for this comment.
They have made a ton of changes in this game, much more good than bad, but in dramatic ways regardless if you compare it to 2004. And you (sometimes overly) creative podders have found ways to adapt and use every single one to your advantage. lol
I look forward to the next year of updates.
~Z |
fr0gout
The Scope Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2012.10.20 03:28:00 -
[244] - Quote
Offgrid boosting is pretty broken. Laughably so. Although there are higher priorities and more broken and **** mechanics to fix first (like ECM). |
Camera Drone
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2012.10.21 14:04:00 -
[245] - Quote
Another thing that would solve all of the boosting issues is to incentivize on-grid boosting instead of trying to nerf all other things. f.e. Make it so that boost modules have an optimal + falloff :)
This would also further promote the use of several boosting ships in 1 fleet. |
Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
105
|
Posted - 2012.10.21 17:52:00 -
[246] - Quote
Camera Drone wrote:Another thing that would solve all of the boosting issues is to incentivize on-grid boosting instead of trying to nerf all other things. f.e. Make it so that boost modules have an optimal + falloff :)
This would also further promote the use of several boosting ships in 1 fleet. No.
Ideas I like. Must be on grid. Remove the ability for T3 to fit command processors. Remove booster role from fleet and automatically assign highest booster attributes to fleet. I feel those three things right there would be a good step in the direction of getting boosts on grid where they belong. |
Dametri
Byzantium Reloaded
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.22 03:01:00 -
[247] - Quote
Schalac wrote:Camera Drone wrote:Another thing that would solve all of the boosting issues is to incentivize on-grid boosting instead of trying to nerf all other things. f.e. Make it so that boost modules have an optimal + falloff :)
This would also further promote the use of several boosting ships in 1 fleet. No. Ideas I like. Must be on grid. Remove the ability for T3 to fit command processors. Remove booster role from fleet and automatically assign highest booster attributes to fleet. I feel those three things right there would be a good step in the direction of getting boosts on grid where they belong.
No.
Ideas I like, as in me myself and I....
Leave it as it is and quit your whining little baby.
|
Zyella Stormborn
Alpha Strategy In Umbra Mortis
156
|
Posted - 2012.10.22 06:18:00 -
[248] - Quote
Dametri wrote:Schalac wrote:Camera Drone wrote:Another thing that would solve all of the boosting issues is to incentivize on-grid boosting instead of trying to nerf all other things. f.e. Make it so that boost modules have an optimal + falloff :)
This would also further promote the use of several boosting ships in 1 fleet. No. Ideas I like. Must be on grid. Remove the ability for T3 to fit command processors. Remove booster role from fleet and automatically assign highest booster attributes to fleet. I feel those three things right there would be a good step in the direction of getting boosts on grid where they belong. No. Ideas I like, as in me myself and I.... Leave it as it is and quit your whining little baby.
He's not alone in the like (at least with the must be on grid point). Get used to it, not sure what the changes are just yet, but from what I have read, there will be changes coming. |
Blodhgarm Dethahal
Transcendent Sedition Dustm3n
3
|
Posted - 2012.11.03 16:26:00 -
[249] - Quote
Simple... real simple solution to Offgrid Boosting...
DON'T let modules that boost Sensor Strength affect the scan ability of the ship. This way ALL ships can be scanned down with reasonable skills (4/3/3/3). As for boosting in POSs, I personally consider that home field advantage personally.
This prevents mobile Offgrid Boosters from being completely unscanable and unkillable. But if you really want to come out of pocket for protection from a POS's FF, I feel thats ok.
Please note I am coming from a Wormholer's point of view. -Bl+¦d
Wormholes are the best Space.. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
362
|
Posted - 2012.11.03 17:30:00 -
[250] - Quote
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:Simple... real simple solution to Offgrid Boosting... Except the issue is not so much that they cannot be scanned down but rather that you one ship that is able to boost up 250 other ships to perform 50%+ better than they would otherwise .. without even being present. Consider the circumstances that led to the Failcon nerf all those years ago .. it was able to do its thing at ranges where only BS snipers could threaten it .. and that is a ship (class) that is only able to affect a handful of ships at best or a single when his mojo fails.
No compromises. On grid or remove. Adjust hulls, modules and skills to make it work.
As for homefield advantage in worms (null has bridges and bubble camps on static entrances): Introduce a POS module that can only be deployed where no Sov exists, said module acts as an amplifier for links deployed in the system, or one could add a booster-for-boosters effect to worms but that would necessarily augment both defender and interloper so doubt worm people would go for that.
They are going to revise Sov at some point SoonGäó so they might as well include such things in the beer guzzling phase, you know the preliminary napkin phase at the pub. |
|
Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
699
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:08:00 -
[251] - Quote
New dev blog is out.
1) off grid boosting is going away 2) they aren't going to swap the 3% and 5% bonuses between CS and T3. They are just going to pimp slap the 5% down to 2% |
Abyssum Invocat
Justified Chaos
33
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:56:00 -
[252] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:New dev blog is out. 1) off grid boosting is going away 2) they aren't going to swap the 3% and 5% bonuses between CS and T3. They are just going to pimp slap the 5% down to 2% Thank ******* Christ. |
Lili Lu
577
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:58:00 -
[253] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:New dev blog is out. 1) off grid boosting is going away 2) they aren't going to swap the 3% and 5% bonuses between CS and T3. They are just going to pimp slap the 5% down to 2%
Yep. Off-grid booster alt tears incoming.
But they definitiely are going to do the right thing by leaving command bonuses at their surrent percentage and dropping the tech III to 2%. The 5% bonuses are too much for either ship. |
Vizvig
Savage Blizzard Bora Alis
15
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 15:37:00 -
[254] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:New dev blog is out.
1) off grid boosting is going away
Yeah... soonGäó |
Major Killz
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
106
|
Posted - 2012.11.08 22:27:00 -
[255] - Quote
"What does that mean in practice? We are removing the distinction between GÇ£fleetGÇ¥ and GÇ£fieldGÇ¥ Command Ships. All of them will now have 3% bonuses to two Warfare Link fields and be able to fit three warfare link modules simultaneously (instead of 3 for fleet versions only). That also means that the previous fleet Command Ships will be rebalanced to fit combat roles. Want to use an Eos as a truly effective drone ship? You can. Or the Damnation as a sexy Khanid missile platform beast? Be our guest. All that matters is the specialization choices you make before undocking by deciding to fit gang links or not, not something forced to you from the arbitrary "field" versus "fleet" hull.
Tech 3 treatment will focus on making them more generalized. Their Warfare Link bonuses will be reduced from 5% to 2% effectiveness; however they will have bonuses to three racial Warfare Link fields while being able to fit three Warfare Link modules simultaneously.
As a side note, as we announced a while ago, we are not pleased by having Warfare Links work outside the battlefield zone, and will be investigating options to move them on grid. Command and Tech3 ships providing that much of an advantage should commit to an engagement instead of being safely parked inside a POS bubble." [SMUG]-áSORRY for party rocking! v0v
|
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
371
|
Posted - 2012.11.09 07:43:00 -
[256] - Quote
Have to admit, the bit about links going on-grid did nothing for me as it was a pretty damn obvious decision .. there are broken things and then there are off-grid T3 booster, they are on a completely different scale of broken-ness.
The thing that made me change my underwear was that they are willing to do a major overhaul of all the CC, including making all of them combat capable, you'll literally have to be on the ball and visually inspect them to see the link effect and even then it can still be a 'dummy' linkship with just one to attract attention and te rest of the highs full of pain. Another thing of interest will be how they go about changing the T3's and the subsystems .. they too will need to have the option of being "beasts" with a command sub or they risk being gimped out of the box. No one will use them as primary linkships if they are dead/vulnerable the second they appear.
...whatever. Links, schminks .. Damnation will be made viable as a "bend over, biatch!" Khanid missile spewing mofo, that alone will probably make me hang around. |
Verushka Atreides
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.09 18:36:00 -
[257] - Quote
On field boosting is pointless. Obviously, primaries, logistics of switching boosters around in fleet constantly even if multiples are brought and the idea of bringing decoy link ships just plain stupid.
Just disable activation in a pos shield (aren't these shields going anyway in the pos revamp? why are you balancing for something you are about to remove?)
Add activation of a gang link increases sig by 100%
You can't run links while in warp, the more you activate the easier you are to scan, the more running around you'd have to do..
This eliminates the being afk aspect. Add's a new aspect/roles to engagements..
|
Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
123
|
Posted - 2012.11.10 04:54:00 -
[258] - Quote
Verushka Atreides wrote:
Add activation of a gang link increases sig by 100%
Why do people keep saying this? Do you want shield CS to become completely worthless or do you not know what sig does in game? |
Elistea
BLUE Regiment.
102
|
Posted - 2012.11.10 08:25:00 -
[259] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:New dev blog is out. 1) off grid boosting is going away 2) they aren't going to swap the 3% and 5% bonuses between CS and T3. They are just going to pimp slap the 5% down to 2%
Great... Another kick into nuts to incursion comunity. Because they werent nerfed hard enough... |
OT Smithers
BLOMI
349
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 08:01:00 -
[260] - Quote
Two things need to be corrected:
1. Off Grid Boosting is flat ridiculous. It seriously is. Nothing else in the game works this way. 2. The amount of bonus you get is flat ludicrous.
|
|
Letrange
Chaosstorm Corporation
56
|
Posted - 2012.11.12 19:58:00 -
[261] - Quote
In all the whine about the 5% being reduced to 2% you missed a few things. For one thing T3 will be able to mix and match 3 types of boosters and the T2 only 2 types. So the claymore (or sleipnir) can have a mix of Skirmish and Shield gang boosters with both getting boni. Admittedly you're implant will only affect 1 type, but it still will allow you to get mixed boni, in much smaller gangs.
Hell, Gallente gangs can look forward to T3 giving armor and skirmish boosts simultaneously. Squadron and fleet crafting is going to get REALLY interesting come Dec 4th and when the BC/BS/CS/SC balancing hits sometime in the new year? It's going to hit high gear. |
Bella Dera
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 20:42:00 -
[262] - Quote
Why don't all you whiners about OGB's just go ahead and make your own game. I personally think CCP is doing a great job, jeesh what a bunch of baby's.
Go CCP!!!!! |
Feffri
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
17
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 22:21:00 -
[263] - Quote
1. I think ogb is fine but they need to make it so that it's as easy to scan down as a regular cruiser. That by itself would take away the advantage.. and add a lot more risk the ogb would have to constantly monitor d scan because at cruiser size you could get one scan hit.
2. Switch cs boost bonus with t3 3. no boosting in pos
That would fix it's overpowerdness (if thats a word) :)
|
Tsobai Hashimoto
FATAL Warfare Hopeless Addiction
58
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 23:16:00 -
[264] - Quote
Karah Serrigan wrote:Noisrevbus wrote:This topic again? I'll give it the same reply i always do. Remove the Command processor modules, almost every percieved abuse of- or malbalance in the system relate back to that one module. The module effectively handicap the ship that use it to do nothing but boost, while boost more. I think alot of you ascribe more to the ability to stay off grid than what it has earnt. The problem is rather that doing so allow you to boost more, so people will explore those options well before they explore eligable alternatives. I don't mind that alts can carry out the role of a main, in part. I mind it, in case of boosting, when it has become more effective to use alts for it. Where alts will completely obscure the use of a main in the same role, and rear it's ugly head at other parts of the game (such as the market; look at mindlink pricing - it may have something to do with the decline of supply from L4, but it also have alot to do with demand, and risk-confident alts happily paying those sums while on-grid mains hesitate). Remove that module and you will effectively cut the performance of exploitation (i mean it as cutting down rainforests, not as breaking rules) by a good two thirds, while positively directing the community toward on-grid use without removing the ability to run off-grid boosts for groups who lack manpower or utilize strategy that involve it. In short, the problem is that off-grid boosting allow three times as many links on average thanks to the Command processor, not that it could exist as an option with equal boost performance but one less ship fullfilling additional roles on the grid. Prior to related issues, such as market splash-off, my groups always used to put at least some boosting on grid and utilize the benefit from the extra module slots you also get on grid. Removing off-grid boosting completely, or swapping bonuses between CS and Tech III will, as other people put it: only reinforce existing trends and popular gameplay (ie., feed the blob). I'm keen on Tech III as focus and CS as blanket. Remove Command processors (and seed mindlinks in the LP-stores) and you will endorse a balance between alts and mains as well as CS and Tech III, without once again massively disrupt balance between small- and large scale to kill off interaction between the two, and get less ships in space. Haven't you fed the blob enough Ytterbium? Bubble changes, etc. Sir, a fleet command ship can natively fit 3 links without the need for command processors. Removing command processors and you will have offgrid claymores linking instead of lokis, who the **** cares. The only difference is that you cant scout iwth them and will need a THIRD client for that role.
a claymore is pretty easy to probe down. and with being able to tank. is more likely to be useful in fleet near logi. than alone and probed down in 10seconds
and allowing t3 to boost one link well and semi hidden you still allow small gangs to have some boost semi safe mind seeing a small sig bloom from link use. maybe 5%
i wouldnt |
Gunship
FATAL Warfare Hopeless Addiction
89
|
Posted - 2012.12.30 01:26:00 -
[265] - Quote
Off grid boosting must be removed from the game. Simple as that.
Boosting modules should have a max range when fitted on a ship. Example 100Km default , the up to 150km with best skills Come join us for Amarr FW pvp-áaction. More info here:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2145548&#post2145548
|
jjohnpaul xvii
CTRL-Q Iron Oxide.
72
|
Posted - 2012.12.31 11:37:00 -
[266] - Quote
Please CCPz dont forget to remove all implants and ammo and ships. I demand heads or tails in space. Simple as that. |
Thomas Gore
Blackfyre Enterprise
131
|
Posted - 2012.12.31 12:07:00 -
[267] - Quote
Pretty easy to spot the OGB (ab)users in this thread.
Stupid mechanic IMO. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
434
|
Posted - 2012.12.31 17:22:00 -
[268] - Quote
Gunship wrote:....Boosting modules should have a max range when fitted on a ship. Example 100Km default , the up to 150km with best skills Would prefer it be the default grid size to give them at least some space-buffer while people re-learn how to pilot a ship that needs to be there but necessarily do much other than just that.
Biggest hurdle will be Grid-Fu shenanigans .. some insane defensive options exist regardless of solution to links (range, grid or combination).
jjohnpaul xvii wrote:Please CCPz dont forget to remove all implants and ammo and ships. I demand heads or tails in space. Simple as that. Wonder of the FoTM lobbies will ever update their talking point slides .. I swear it has been the same nonsense every time a change has been proposed/discussed since I started |
Vizvig
Savage Blizzard Bora Alis
68
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 15:55:00 -
[269] - Quote
jjohnpaul xvii wrote:Please CCPz dont forget to remove all implants and ammo and ships. I demand heads or tails in space. Simple as that. Cannot win without 2 boosters sitting in POS? |
Zarnak Wulf
In Exile.
879
|
Posted - 2013.01.01 16:33:00 -
[270] - Quote
So much hate. They announced the 5% will go to 2%. That is a pretty significant nerf. I say make it so that if you leave the presence of your booster the effects fade after 'x' amount of time and call it good. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |