Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Chvra Noxx
Hephaestus LLC Gryphon League
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:18:00 -
[1] - Quote
When i was going through the Sisi Dumps, i noticed something interesting, Tech II gang links http://pastebin.com/TkY3rY6q
Was wondering if someone else noticed them and what peoples thoughts on them are. |
Tramp Oline
District of Power
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:35:00 -
[2] - Quote
It really depends on how they implement them. In the past you could expect a nerf in the T1 items so that you need to train up additional skills for the T2 items just to get back to where you were (maybe a little better) before the patch. |
mxzf
Shovel Bros
93
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:52:00 -
[3] - Quote
Yeah, I noticed them too. It looks like they go from a 2% base bonus to 2.5%. Useful for minmaxing (which is what most boosting alts do), but less so if you're not already dedicated to boosting.
I think that anyone who's dedicated to boosting will get them, but I don't think it's worth the 17-21d of extra training for most characters unless you're already going for Spec 5 anyways. That's what I'm thinking from what I've seen atleast. |
Tamiya Sarossa
Hedion University Amarr Empire
50
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 20:24:00 -
[4] - Quote
25% more effectiveness than t1 links? That's freaking huge. Anyone who is regularly running these has Spec V for the mindlink anyway, so it will be no problem to use the t2 links. This is going to be hilarious when it hits TQ.
Hint CCP: make ganglinks only work on grid, make the game much more interesting. (This is coming from someone with a maxed t3 gangboosting char) |
Dark Pangolin
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 20:32:00 -
[5] - Quote
Tamiya Sarossa wrote:
Hint CCP: make ganglinks only work on grid, make the game much more interesting. (This is coming from someone with a maxed t3 gangboosting char)
But then why would you pay for your extra 3 gang boosters that sit in a POS?...that would be silly...1 account per player pfffff :) |
Chvra Noxx
Hephaestus LLC Gryphon League
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 20:44:00 -
[6] - Quote
I typically just use skirmish links for incursions at the moment, so i'd probably get the t2 skirm links at least lol. |
Lady Naween
Dark Steel Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 04:14:00 -
[7] - Quote
as someone with 15.8 mill Sp in Leadership.....
YES!!!!!
Though what will i do with the rather large stack of t1 links i got laying around *laughs*
|
NoNah
Hyper-Nova
20
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 08:37:00 -
[8] - Quote
Only way to actually make this reasonable would be to force t2 links to be on grid. I doubt that'll ever happen. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 09:07:00 -
[9] - Quote
they should also fix the stupid shield hp bonus |
Soon Shin
Abyssal Heavy Industries Narwhals Ate My Duck
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 04:48:00 -
[10] - Quote
Lady Naween wrote:as someone with 15.8 mill Sp in Leadership.....
YES!!!!!
Though what will i do with the rather large stack of t1 links i got laying around *laughs*
Use them to produce tech 2 versions of the ganglinks. |
|
Skarned
Inroads
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 05:20:00 -
[11] - Quote
Making ganglink alts useful to the point that they become mandatory even for small gangs is not a good way to increase subsciptions, CCP. |
Desudes
Federal Defence Union Gallente Federation
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 05:45:00 -
[12] - Quote
Skarned wrote:Making ganglink alts useful to the point that they become mandatory even for small gangs is not a good way to increase subsciptions, CCP.
On-grid boosting only. Buff Tier 1 BCs ability to use links + guns.
Ta-da... Excuse me, but what the f*ck are you desu? |
Archare
SKEET ELITE
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 07:14:00 -
[13] - Quote
mxzf wrote:Yeah, I noticed them too. It looks like they go from a 2% base bonus to 2.5%. Useful for minmaxing (which is what most boosting alts do), but less so if you're not already dedicated to boosting.
I think that anyone who's dedicated to boosting will get them, but I don't think it's worth the 17-21d of extra training for most characters unless you're already going for Spec 5 anyways. That's what I'm thinking from what I've seen atleast.
Spec 5 also allows you to use the mindlink implant which makes a huge difference in boosts |
Dorian Wylde
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
53
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 14:52:00 -
[14] - Quote
Dark Pangolin wrote:Tamiya Sarossa wrote:
Hint CCP: make ganglinks only work on grid, make the game much more interesting. (This is coming from someone with a maxed t3 gangboosting char)
But then why would you pay for your extra 3 gang boosters that sit in a POS?...that would be silly...1 account per player pfffff :)
Multiboxing is hard.
On grid only would be great. Could actually fly my fleet command ships more. |
VaMei
Meafi Corp
62
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 15:27:00 -
[15] - Quote
Desudes wrote:Skarned wrote:Making ganglink alts useful to the point that they become mandatory even for small gangs is not a good way to increase subsciptions, CCP. On-grid boosting only. Buff Tier 1 BCs ability to use links + guns. Ta-da...
That and in the same vein, a combat version of the T2 destroyers geared to be a frigate leader. |
Any Guy
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 00:17:00 -
[16] - Quote
T2 ganglinks are worthy. The increase of 0.5% is a huge amount when put on valid high-spec toons.
As to having ganglinks only active on grid that will suck. I've been in plenty of fights where the grid divides unexpectedly and half of the fleet is in one fight and the other is not on grid. You could end up with massive disadvantages occurring. |
Veryez
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 03:08:00 -
[17] - Quote
This would be so nice..... |
Mina Sebiestar
Mactabilis Simplex Cursus
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 03:35:00 -
[18] - Quote
looking forward to this and praying the gods of eve(ccp) to nerf the crap out of off grid boosting as well. |
Noisrevbus
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 13:09:00 -
[19] - Quote
I must admit i don't quite see the point in them. I should be honest and reserve my comments for revision once we see how the new links pan out in effect (maybe they manage to throw some balance somewhere), but leadership already had a sane progression between skill bonus to link bonus to mindlink bonus.
As far as training incentive go, these new links provide nothing - so what remains to be seen is how the added strength of the bonuses impact on different gang-concepts (ie., could it improve performance of tech II resisted gangs by hitting a higher mitigation breakpoint when facing mainly tech I comprised groups). Either that, or wether CCP have something extra up their sleave - such as limiting them to CS to bridge the gap between CS and Tech III. |
Chvra Noxx
Hephaestus LLC Gryphon League
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 16:14:00 -
[20] - Quote
Noisrevbus wrote: Either that, or wether CCP have something extra up their sleave - such as limiting them to CS to bridge the gap between CS and Tech III.
Part of me highly doubts CCP would do this, TIII is really supposed to be better than TII. |
|
Lili Lu
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 17:35:00 -
[21] - Quote
Chvra Noxx wrote:Noisrevbus wrote: Either that, or wether CCP have something extra up their sleave - such as limiting them to CS to bridge the gap between CS and Tech III. Part of me highly doubts CCP would do this, TIII is really supposed to be better than TII.
No it's not. The idea with TIII was to provide adaptability in one hull. It was not to create a better ship that would obsolete and replace tech II ships. Of course with T3 command subsystems then they failed to account for the min/maxing craziness of absurd fits with officer co-pros and commnad processors with ntohing but links warping to ss or sitting at a pos handing out better bonuses than a command ship (when the command ship requires more sp).
The slightly (10%?) increased cpu reqs of tech II command links may limit the number of links a T3 can be crammed with, I have not bothered to check the numbers. Regardless it still leaves a stupid situation where T3s can be fit to do a command ship's job better in safety off-grid.
Neither commands or T3s should be off grid. They should be on grid and tanked to live or die with they fleet they are buffing. |
MichaelWest
Eve Defence Force Fatal Ascension
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 21:02:00 -
[22] - Quote
Lili Lu wrote:
Neither commands or T3s should be off grid. They should be on grid and tanked to live or die with they fleet they are buffing.
That seems to be the general consensus . I agree. |
Gasm
Colossus Enterprises
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 22:38:00 -
[23] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:they should also fix the stupid shield hp bonus
they said they are fixing it. which makes me very happy in the pants. |
A'Brantox Foson
SKEET ELITE
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 04:19:00 -
[24] - Quote
Gasm wrote:Naomi Knight wrote:they should also fix the stupid shield hp bonus they said they are fixing it. which makes me very happy in the pants. I mite be wrong here, but... nerf slave implants while yer at it. |
Mfume Apocal
Origin. Black Legion.
93
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 12:51:00 -
[25] - Quote
I'm somewhat disappointed they didn't use the opportunity to give point/web range link more power. Really, being able to comfortably (i.e. without overheat) point/web targets at distances that could take advantage of recon's superb lock range would have opened up the field to so many new fleet comps. As it is now, you need mass-tackle to keep "short" range damage dealers from warping on-top of ranged/kiting fleets, but the mass-tackle provided by hics and dics isn't survivable enough in the face of competent opposition. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |