Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 33 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 29 post(s) |
pyropwnsu
Offline.
2
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:04:00 -
[271] - Quote
TinkerHell wrote:Dear CCP,
I cant say i like these changes as i believe this always will benefit the larger gangs. The problem with links is the fact they exist.
Please reconsider.
I suggest just deleting links from game completely and reimbursing the SP. That way no one needs whine the other fleet has links, the smaller fleet wont get raped by the gang fielding a mass of logi to protect their command ship.
Everyone is happy.
Thanks.
What this guy said. This game would be much better off without links as a whole. Rather than buffing or nerfing links, you should consider moving those bonuses into skillbooks or buff/nerf elsewhere. How has this not been changed yet? |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1257
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:10:00 -
[272] - Quote
I like where the this thread is going right now.
This line of thinking has promise. BYDI recruitment closed-ish |
Korg Leaf
Nocturnal Romance
71
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:11:00 -
[273] - Quote
Deleting links is the best way to go, they are going to keep getting nerfed into the ground until they are completely pointless to use, so be done with it, delete them and refund the SP.
It is the simplest solution here, as TinkerHell said you need link's to counter bigger gangs when doing small gang warfare (as they have links aswell) if neither side have links, then no one has any distinct advantage.
Thank you. |
Aznwithbeard
OMGROFLSTOMP Ushra'Khan
53
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:12:00 -
[274] - Quote
Just seems to me this is another blow to solo/small gang PVP as a whole, and another huge leap for blob warfare.
I guess i need another subscription to fil lthe role of scout as my slow warping unwarpable while cloaked commandship and whatever ship im trying to 5v1 with wait on the gate.
Outside pos fields? awesome idea.
Would suggest maybe just flipping the percentages (5% per level for cs... 3 for t3) and/or giving the CS an ability to warp cloaked.
Again, you just keep smashing down small gang stuff.
WHERE ARE YOU KIL2. OMGROFLSTOMP
"We sort of mean business 75% of the time" |
Dewa Pedang
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
11
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:13:00 -
[275] - Quote
TinkerHell wrote:Dear CCP,
I cant say i like these changes as i believe this always will benefit the larger gangs. The problem with links is the fact they exist.
Please reconsider.
I suggest just deleting links from game completely and reimbursing the SP. That way no one needs whine the other fleet has links, the smaller fleet wont get raped by the gang fielding a mass of logi to protect their command ship.
Everyone is happy.
Thanks.
Getting sp back yumi . |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1257
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:16:00 -
[276] - Quote
Aznwithbeard wrote:Just seems to me this is another blow to solo/small gang PVP as a whole, and another huge leap for blob warfare.
I guess i need another subscription to fil lthe role of scout as my slow warping unwarpable while cloaked commandship and whatever ship im trying to 5v1 with wait on the gate.
Outside pos fields? awesome idea.
Would suggest maybe just flipping the percentages (5% per level for cs... 3 for t3) and/or giving the CS an ability to warp cloaked.
Again, you just keep smashing down small gang stuff.
WHERE ARE YOU KIL2.
Nerfing links % is bad for small gangs? You are awful. BYDI recruitment closed-ish |
Kintaris Zulu
Obsidian Squadron Novus Dominatum
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:16:00 -
[277] - Quote
TinkerHell wrote:Dear CCP,
I cant say i like these changes as i believe this always will benefit the larger gangs. The problem with links is the fact they exist.
Please reconsider.
I suggest just deleting links from game completely and reimbursing the SP. That way no one needs whine the other fleet has links, the smaller fleet wont get raped by the gang fielding a mass of logi to protect their command ship.
Everyone is happy.
Thanks.
Totally agree, Links are good in theory but in the mass rebalancing of ships and whatnot that seems to be going on.. The biggest imbalance is still there..
|
Leilani Solaris
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
15
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:16:00 -
[278] - Quote
I like the sound of deleting links. Eve was fine before they were introduced, it'll be fine still if they're taken out. |
Jason Dunham
Andvaranaut Conglomerate
6
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:18:00 -
[279] - Quote
I think it's interesting how little of the replies here have any thought or effort put into them.
"Whine, whine, you ruined it" doesn't help them at all. Some of you have actually taken the time to look at current bonuses and fitting, and provide your opinion, which is helpful. But just saying that CCP ruined it or insulting them isn't going to help anything and isn't going to inspire any action.
One of the things you should recognize is that just because things change doesn't mean they're ruined. Just because ships don't work the way you used to use them doesn't mean they're ruined. Have some ingenuity, be flexible, and adapt to the new changes.
Above all, if you're going to provide feedback, take the time to calm down and organize your thoughts. If you think they overlooked something, politely and clearly identify it, not as an accusation, but as a question.
The other point you need to recognize is to look at the changes as a whole, not just the thread you're in. Boosts to local reps are going to affect command ships, whose use is going to be affected by the link and mindlink changes. There are still ships to be balanced, so the picture isn't complete yet. I'm sure that many of the concerns you bring up were discussed at CCP, and there may be future plans to address those concerns, or changes that will make them unnecessary.
The bottom line is, you're working with imperfect knowledge, so some humility and respect would go a long way.
(Asking for rationality and respect on the internet is probably a flawed plan, but I figured I'd give it a shot.) |
Sigras
Conglomo
475
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:22:00 -
[280] - Quote
Beidorion eldwardan wrote:Damnation: Amarr Battlecruiser skill bonuses: 4% bonus to all Armor Resistances 10% bonus to Heavy Assault Missile and Heavy Missile velocity Command Ships skill bonuses: 10% bonus to all Armor hitpoints 10% bonus to Heavy Assault Missile and Heavy Missile damage (Was link bonus) Fixed Bonus: Can fit up to three Warfare Link modules, 15% bonus to strength of Armored Warfare and Information Warfare links Slot layout: 7 H, 4 M, 6 L , 2 turrets (-2), 5 Launchers Fittings: 1300(-290) PWG, 500(+25) CPU <--- here is the herf Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 3500(+37) / 5000(+395) / 4300(-24) Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 0 / 20 / 70 / 87.5 Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 50 / 35 / 62.5 / 80 Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 3375 / 750s / 4.5 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 150 / 0.7(-0.004) / 13500000 / 13.10s(-0.08) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 (+25) / 100 (+75) Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 70km (+20) / 210 / 7(+1) Sensor strength: 22 Radar (+6) Signature radius: 265 Cargo capacity: 645
so this means that with your so called fitting buff with the 100 powergrid reduction per module really means that a damnation only get another 10 powergrid total. nice ninja nerf there butt heads. could you not stop the sugar coating nerfs please have the balls to stand by the crap your body ( the company ) makes and stop with the politically correct terms call a donkey by its proper name an A + double SS
ps this forum NEEED a dislike post botton SO bad so . . . you're saying that the damnation getting an extra 10 PG is a nerf? im confused . . . |
|
Klown Walk
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
212
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:23:00 -
[281] - Quote
That "nerf" is not enough. |
i'myour goddess
Nocturnal Romance
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:31:00 -
[282] - Quote
yes the idea of ridding the game of links is something that could bring a new future......
|
Cavalira
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
150
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:32:00 -
[283] - Quote
TinkerHell wrote:Dear CCP,
I cant say i like these changes as i believe this always will benefit the larger gangs. The problem with links is the fact they exist.
Please reconsider.
I suggest just deleting links from game completely and reimbursing the SP. That way no one needs whine the other fleet has links, the smaller fleet wont get raped by the gang fielding a mass of logi to protect their command ship.
Everyone is happy.
Thanks.
Honestly, you're right. |
Maelgar
Nocturnal Romance
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:33:00 -
[284] - Quote
delete them and give me back the SP I have in leadership for the links.... nom nom. |
Raging Beaver
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
25
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:33:00 -
[285] - Quote
The whole idea is very nice but I think the overall bonuses of the combat links should be nerfed much more. In my perfect eve there are no combat links at all, but as this would cause a rage of epic proportions I understand it won't happen (or maybe...some day...), therefore, I'd say the maximum overall bonus of each link should never exceed 15%.
T3 boosters - these should have no link strength bonus at all, the fact that they can remain off grid, get there with virtually no risk, be nearly impossible to probe down and have multiple links running should be quite enough.
The suggestion that came up a couple of times in this thread that a booster ship should inherit timers from the ships it's boosting is also a very good one (however this should apply only once the links are running). Want to have a booster to help you suicide-gank in highsec? Say goodbye to the booster. Want to keep a CS on undock while boosting a fight on the gate? Sorry, can't dock until weapon aggro passes. Seems pretty fair to me - maybe indirectly, but the ship is taking a part in the fight.
As for the suggestions to introduce a distance from the POS shield where the links can be started - pointless - what will stop such a booster from staying aligned to a tower and warping in there at the first sign of threat?
Also - Fozzie - thank you for a healhy dose of leet-peeveepee tears, all of a sudden they feel threatened? Aren't their superior skills (...of getting the booster alt into the system) enough? Oh, and please hurry with the elimination of off-grid boosting (grids need to be fixed first, eh?). |
Cearain
Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo
1036
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:38:00 -
[286] - Quote
Dez Affinity wrote:Cearain wrote:
Yeah in allot of ways ccp is actually buffing ogbs:
Adding new navy links which give 2 bonuses
Making links much cheaper.
Power grid for links reduced
t3s now provide 3 groups of bonues.
Adding bonus with scan res to boost gate camps.
I can see why those who exploi...use ogbs view this as "fair." They get to use this **** mechanic for the forseeable future.
Update on ending ogbs= Still no end in sight.
You realise t3s went from 5 percent per level to 2 percent per level but across 3 races now?
Yes I do. Its a horrible mechanic whether the net boost is 5% or 50%.
Dez Affinity wrote: You realise that if they didn't have a t3 they'd have a falcon - they won't just unsub their character. But then you'd be here whining about falcons again.
They won't use falcons because then no one will fight them anymore. (you get added to peoples contact list when you do lame stuff like that.) Plus falcons show up on the killmail so it destroys the whole point of their running alt accounts hidden away in safespots to get a pro killboard.
The best troll ccp could do is add the t3 booster ships that effected combat retroactively to killmails.
I don't think they will unsub their account. I will just be glad when the horrible ogb mechanic will end and eve will stop being the game where you need to multibox a booster alt to be competive. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Dracorimus
Nocturnal Romance
5
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:40:00 -
[287] - Quote
TinkerHell wrote:Dear CCP,
I cant say i like these changes as i believe this always will benefit the larger gangs. The problem with links is the fact they exist.
Please reconsider.
I suggest just deleting links from game completely and reimbursing the SP. That way no one needs whine the other fleet has links, the smaller fleet wont get raped by the gang fielding a mass of logi to protect their command ship.
Everyone is happy.
Thanks.
Absolutely right |
Draekas Darkwater
Frank Exchange of Views Accidentally The Whole Thing
16
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:41:00 -
[288] - Quote
Should the benefits of using these modules really trickle down to entire fleets as they do currently? Seems to me it would be mean more if there was only squad boosting only. That way you'd have to be selective about what links you picked (since you can't have everything anymore), and the bonus from one player isn't so completely overpowering as to greatly buff potentially hundreds of players in the fleet. |
Anna niedostepny
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
5
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:42:00 -
[289] - Quote
TinkerHell wrote:Dear CCP,
I cant say i like these changes as i believe this always will benefit the larger gangs. The problem with links is the fact they exist.
Please reconsider.
I suggest just deleting links from game completely and reimbursing the SP. That way no one needs whine the other fleet has links, the smaller fleet wont get raped by the gang fielding a mass of logi to protect their command ship.
Everyone is happy.
Thanks.
+1 please do this. |
F3X5ON
Nocturnal Romance
7
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:42:00 -
[290] - Quote
TinkerHell wrote:Dear CCP,
I cant say i like these changes as i believe this always will benefit the larger gangs. The problem with links is the fact they exist.
Please reconsider.
I suggest just deleting links from game completely and reimbursing the SP. That way no one needs whine the other fleet has links, the smaller fleet wont get raped by the gang fielding a mass of logi to protect their command ship.
Everyone is happy.
Thanks.
I support this.
|
|
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
314
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:44:00 -
[291] - Quote
Now give the Eos back its 125 drones bandwidth and we can be friends. |
Mimiko Severovski
Angelic Eclipse.
2
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:46:00 -
[292] - Quote
Remove links entirely please, it will be beneficial to everyone in EVE.
Thank you CCP for doing an awsome job at destroying small gang and solo pvp!
Also gimme my sp back!
|
JannaMies
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 22:49:00 -
[293] - Quote
TinkerHell wrote:Dear CCP,
I cant say i like these changes as i believe this always will benefit the larger gangs. The problem with links is the fact they exist.
Please reconsider.
I suggest just deleting links from game completely and reimbursing the SP. That way no one needs whine the other fleet has links, the smaller fleet wont get raped by the gang fielding a mass of logi to protect their command ship.
Everyone is happy.
Thanks.
THIS!
EVERYONE WOULD BE HAPPY, AND ALSO REMOVE MINING LINKS, MAKE THEM ONGRID SO I CAN GANK MORE ORCAS |
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
820
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 23:01:00 -
[294] - Quote
Strength of link bonuses should be inversely proportional to the number of people that they apply to. Not sure how you'd exactly implement this though. |
Klown Walk
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
214
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 23:08:00 -
[295] - Quote
+1 For removing links. |
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2206
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 23:11:00 -
[296] - Quote
TinkerHell wrote:Dear CCP,
I cant say i like these changes as i believe this always will benefit the larger gangs. The problem with links is the fact they exist.
Please reconsider.
I suggest just deleting links from game completely and reimbursing the SP. That way no one needs whine the other fleet has links, the smaller fleet wont get raped by the gang fielding a mass of logi to protect their command ship.
Everyone is happy.
Thanks. +1
|
Eukaryotic
Swarm Coalition Interstellar Conquest Enterprises
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 23:12:00 -
[297] - Quote
I am a new player who likes to solo pvp. I find myself getting killed in small engagements alot because someone is linked to hell by an offgrid booster. I have no chance against them and do not want to pay to win to be able to compete with this tactic. I refuse to buy another account. That is dumb. Smaller scale pvp has evolved into buying new accounts to win, what kind of game does that make this. It is demoralizing to new players who think they will have fun flying by themselves and fighting.
New players having low sp, low isk, and little experience take a big risk when they pvp because often times the opponent is superior in these categories but instead of being encouraged to continue this brave type of gameplay despite the odds against them, it is like they are being punished by off grid boosters to just forget about pvping because without links it isn't happening.
And the sad part, many do forget pvp and some Eve. But that's okay right CCP? More links = more subs right? Dishonor.
Please remove links. |
Hexatron Ormand
Aperture Space New Eden Industrie Alliance
23
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 23:18:00 -
[298] - Quote
As someone noted before, for mining, the increased lockrange, and increased laser range complemented each other.
Without the lockrange boost from leadership skills, the improved laser range will not be all too useful, as it is suddenly capped by the ships lock range.
What are you planning to do there? Give mining barges a higher lockrange bonus into the base hull to compensate for the lost leadership lock range boost? |
Sigras
Conglomo
476
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 23:19:00 -
[299] - Quote
Aznwithbeard wrote:Why does it not surprise me that CCP nerfed all the useful links (siege, skirmish, armor) and kept the ewar crap strong?
+1 for taking boosting outta pos shields - a million for making it that much harder to fight outnumbered :/
CS5 in queue - check. you realize that e-war is a way to fight outnumbered right?
you realize that no matter what you do, gang boosts will benefit a large fleet over a small one right? |
Sigras
Conglomo
476
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 23:20:00 -
[300] - Quote
Eukaryotic wrote:I am a new player who likes to solo pvp. I find myself getting killed in small engagements alot because someone is linked to hell by an offgrid booster. I have no chance against them and do not want to pay to win to be able to compete with this tactic. I refuse to buy another account. That is dumb. Smaller scale pvp has evolved into buying new accounts to win, what kind of game does that make this. It is demoralizing to new players who think they will have fun flying by themselves and fighting.
New players having low sp, low isk, and little experience take a big risk when they pvp because often times the opponent is superior in these categories but instead of being encouraged to continue this brave type of gameplay despite the odds against them, it is like they are being punished by off grid boosters to just forget about pvping because without links it isn't happening.
And the sad part, many do forget pvp and some Eve. But that's okay right CCP? More links = more subs right? Dishonor.
Please remove links. you dont want links removed, you want links brought on grid. Removing links removes meaningful choices from the game, forcing them on grid adds meaningful choices to the game. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 33 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |