Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Baali Tekitsu
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
704
|
Posted - 2015.03.22 12:46:52 -
[31] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Bubbles is the answer!
We all know a hictor can fit a bubble for the use in nullsec or w-space, so why not make links have larger 'link-bubble' of let's say its 150 or 200km (range is debatable and just an example)?
Would fix the ongrid thing and all of a sudden you see more command ships that are not the sleignir on gates being hugged by their fleet buddies.
This idea is not new, was posted like 1000 times and dismissed every time.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5600008#post5600008
RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE
|
Tikktokk Tokkzikk
Alekhine's Gun The Periphery
206
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 10:30:21 -
[32] - Quote
The information warfare link could also be split up even further with a specific scripts for the specific E-wars. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
868
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 11:28:50 -
[33] - Quote
To my mind, achieving the result of making warfare links more fun and fair to use is easy:
1. Make a warfare link trigger a combat timer and inherit suspect timers from anyone affected.
2. Require the ship to be on grid.
Benefits are:
1. Removes the riskless force multiplier of an off-grid booster.
2. forces the squad booster to participate in combat.
3. Gives the other side a strategic choice (attack the booster, or attack someone else?)
4. Gives the boosting side some strategic choices (bring more DPS or bring more links?)
Drawbacks are:
1. Large fleets risk losing boosts due to alpha - counter is to field redundancy. Again, strategic choices.
2. A few low-sec and high-sec pirate corps will need to re-evaluate tactics vis-a-vis out-of-corp boosters in safe spots (in my mind an exploit anyway).
3. I'll need to risk my EOS on grid when I run c6 sleeper ops - this is really not an issue.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
vikari
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Nulli Secunda
114
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 12:31:24 -
[34] - Quote
I'm concerned these bonuses can be to strong, when stacked with other bonuses. We get up to 3 sets of bonuses on a fleet, using the Fleet/Wing/Squad commander positions. What if the fleet was in armor HACs, and the links were Passive Defense, Evasive Maneuvers, and Rapid Deployment. Now we have a ship that already has a great speed/sig ratio, and you toss in that you are getting it 9.7% bonus per level (over the roughly 6% now), add in that you are giving them a sig radius reduction of 9.7% (over the roughly 8% now) and 9.7% MWD/AB speed boost (over the 8% now) and you can get some extremely strong effects. This all adds into the fact that the leadership skills themselves add bonuses to a fleet (such ass Armored Warfare's 2% armor HP per level, and Skirmish Warfare's 2% agility per level).
I see what you are trying to do, but in several fleet doctrines we only need two or three bonuses, so in those case you are going to make the fleet extremely over powered, because the FC's are not choosing between one bonus and another. This will result in CCP needing to do some serious rebalancing across dozens or more ships, and ultimately be too time consuming when we have ships now that are in dire need to rebalancing, |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate
868
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 12:36:06 -
[35] - Quote
By forcing the booster on grid, you achieve 2 things:
1. The booster can be primaried, eliminating the bonus for the entire fleet/squad
2. The boosting ship, being a command ship, is always going to be slow - so he can't use rapid deployment to the same effect as a HAC. Unless the HACs (and logi) stick around, he'll go down.
Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1174
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 13:22:22 -
[36] - Quote
Not a bad concept, but I would add in a few other items.
1) inactive links need to boost your sig radius (meaning your easier to lock and shoot while they are turned off)
2) Active links need to reduce your sensor strength by 80 to 90% (basically your sig returns to normal, but you are much easier to probe out). basically kills the eccm deal.
3) Active links penalize the velocity bonus of afterburner and microwarp drive modules (similar to what what a warp disruption field generator does). (no more 2 to 4kM speeding link boosters).
The rest is fine.
Yaay!!!!
|
Agondray
Avenger Mercenaries VOID Intergalactic Forces
256
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 13:44:21 -
[37] - Quote
joecuster wrote:Tfw poors/pubbies crying about links because they're too lazy to train for them.
ill I see aout links is QQ over not being able to scan them down in low and null so they kill it while having to kill someone else and how a booster should be on the grid in low and null and solves nothing for the hisec pvpers that stand on station kill whoever they want with their army of alts.
-1 for anything against links as even in our time voyager is past the solar system and we can still tell it what to do. +1 for removing alts from the gate to force others toactually do things they speak out against
"Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith
|
Agondray
Avenger Mercenaries VOID Intergalactic Forces
256
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 13:46:51 -
[38] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:Not a bad concept, but I would add in a few other items.
1) inactive links need to boost your sig radius (meaning your easier to lock and shoot while they are turned off)
2) Active links need to reduce your sensor strength by 80 to 90% (basically your sig returns to normal, but you are much easier to probe out). basically kills the eccm deal.
3) Active links penalize the velocity bonus of afterburner and microwarp drive modules (similar to what what a warp disruption field generator does). (no more 2 to 4kM speeding link boosters).
The rest is fine.
why would an offline module make you easier to target? if it was online and doing this I would agree with this more as your emitting a signal that can be used to lock on to easier.
Velocity bonus I can agree to only if it stays an offgrid, if its going to turn into an on grid booster one day your going to want all the speed you can get as the interceptor chases you down
"Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith
|
Adacia Calla
Nubs.
63
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 15:01:59 -
[39] - Quote
Tikktokk Tokkzikk wrote:The goal is to make warfare links fun, skill intensive and balanced for fleets of any size in a way that's viable right now and doesn't require new technology: [list]
Remove Command Processors Command ships and strategic cruisers with the Warfare Processor subsystem can fit two links Warfare links trigger a weapon timer. Like I said on TS the other night, I think adding a Weapons Timer would solve 90% of them problem. It would force alts to spend a LOT more time warping around, therefore a lot less up-time on said links since they can't be enabled during warp. This would be a 'simple' fix (Probably wouldn't be code-wise) but it's far less of a headache than a entire rebalance on the link system for the time being.
Test signature....forum not applying settings :(
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1178
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 15:35:34 -
[40] - Quote
Agondray wrote:Phoenix Jones wrote:Not a bad concept, but I would add in a few other items.
1) inactive links need to boost your sig radius (meaning your easier to lock and shoot while they are turned off)
2) Active links need to reduce your sensor strength by 80 to 90% (basically your sig returns to normal, but you are much easier to probe out). basically kills the eccm deal.
3) Active links penalize the velocity bonus of afterburner and microwarp drive modules (similar to what what a warp disruption field generator does). (no more 2 to 4kM speeding link boosters).
The rest is fine. why would an offline module make you easier to target? if it was online and doing this I would agree with this more as your emitting a signal that can be used to lock on to easier. Velocity bonus I can agree to only if it stays an offgrid, if its going to turn into an on grid booster one day your going to want all the speed you can get as the interceptor chases you down
I've run into my share of cloaky interdiction nullified off grid t3 boosters. Trying to catch them on a gate sucks.
This is solely regarding off grid boosters. If they all turned into ongrid boosters all of the above can be tossed.
Yaay!!!!
|
|
Tikktokk Tokkzikk
Alekhine's Gun The Periphery
207
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 19:53:58 -
[41] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:Not a bad concept, but I would add in a few other items.
1) inactive links need to boost your sig radius (meaning your easier to lock and shoot while they are turned off)
2) Active links need to reduce your sensor strength by 80 to 90% (basically your sig returns to normal, but you are much easier to probe out). basically kills the eccm deal.
3) Active links penalize the velocity bonus of afterburner and microwarp drive modules (similar to what what a warp disruption field generator does). (no more 2 to 4kM speeding link boosters).
The rest is fine.
It's impossible to be unprobeable anymore and I don't like the idea of penalizing signature radius, sensor strength or speed as this would equally much punish on-grid links. |
Arthur Aihaken
Narada
4203
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 19:59:49 -
[42] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:2. Require the ship to be on grid. CCP has previously indicated that this is a deal breaker in terms of server performance. So I don't think it's in the cards, unfortunately.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
WhyYouHeffToBeMad IsOnlyGame
7125
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 21:14:46 -
[43] - Quote
Tikktokk Tokkzikk wrote:scripts that boost one bonus by 200% at the expense of the other two if the expense is 100% boost at 25% off the other two, sure.
also, you use links a lot, surely you'd want the values to be higher.
Everything's a game if you make it one - Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci
Frostys Virpio > CCP: Continously Crying Playerbase
|
Reina Xyaer
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
79
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 21:36:11 -
[44] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:2. Require the ship to be on grid. CCP has previously indicated that this is a deal breaker in terms of server performance. So I don't think it's in the cards, unfortunately.
CCP has previously been wrong, lied, and/or pulled excuses out of their a*ses.
Someone pointed out in a thread recently...
Watchlist shows HP bars when a fleet member is On-grid....
And Watchlist does NOT show HP bars when a fleet member is Off-grid...
So... the code is there, no excuses. |
Count Szadek
Relentless Terrorism Already Disbanded
8
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 23:30:51 -
[45] - Quote
I honestly think there is no problem to Links themselves, however, I do feel there is no counter (as everything in eve should have a counter IMO). So I would instead suggest a counter. Perhaps something like this:
A Drop-able Unit That lays a field around it where ships inside become "unlinked". That way if you dont want to fight with links just bring one of these along, and counter them on the field. This effectively makes off - grid boosting still do-able, but at least it could be countered. And the fact that they are destroyable (y destroying the Unit) , linked fleets can adjust primary as needed.
Essentially it would Work sorta like Cyno Jammers except it would stop the bonus(es) in the field |
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox Low-Class
7526
|
Posted - 2015.03.24 00:24:06 -
[46] - Quote
Links themselves are nice, very nice. I use them regularly.
Where they become imbalanced is when I'm boosting safely from the edge of a tower shield or safed up and decloaking at just the right time.
If ongrid boosting was all that you could do, it would be perfect, it would be balanced just right and you could maybe even at that point look at adding links to ships like destroyers and such. Links are a big SP investment and they should be worth it. Links should be fun to have, and lead to engaging roles, not to sitting in a safespot.
Fear and Loathing in Internet Spaceships
|
Tikktokk Tokkzikk
Alekhine's Gun The Periphery
207
|
Posted - 2015.03.27 15:08:24 -
[47] - Quote
Saede Riordan wrote:Links themselves are nice, very nice. I use them regularly.
Where they become imbalanced is when I'm boosting safely from the edge of a tower shield or safed up and decloaking at just the right time.
If ongrid boosting was all that you could do, it would be perfect, it would be balanced just right and you could maybe even at that point look at adding links to ships like destroyers and such. Links are a big SP investment and they should be worth it. Links should be fun to have, and lead to engaging roles, not to sitting in a safespot.
You really think a 30% speed increase and 34% signature reduction is balanced? The entire fleet gets high grade Snakes and Halos for basically free. Let's not forget about the tanking links which are similar to Slaves and Crystals.
Off-grid links are only a problem because of their massive boost and near invulnerabilty at gates or stations. The nerf to link strength will fix the first and the weapon timer will fix the second. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
976
|
Posted - 2015.03.27 15:18:50 -
[48] - Quote
You (and CCP) are overthinking it.
You dont need to "force" links on grid via convoluted mechanisms.
You beacon the things like a cyno so any idiot can warp to them.
So no, you're not changing any code to "force" them on grid and if people want to run off grid they still can. But tell me.....who is going to? |
Reina Xyaer
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
83
|
Posted - 2015.03.27 18:28:36 -
[49] - Quote
afkalt wrote:You (and CCP) are overthinking it.
You dont need to "force" links on grid via convoluted mechanisms.
You beacon the things like a cyno so any idiot can warp to them.
So no, you're not changing any code to "force" them on grid and if people want to run off grid they still can. But tell me.....who is going to?
Um mostly everyone still, because most off-grid links are used sitting on gates. So this would do nothing.
Make them only affect fleet members that are on-grid. It's so simple, just do it CCP. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
977
|
Posted - 2015.03.27 19:04:29 -
[50] - Quote
Sitting on a gate is stupiditiy itself, unless you're in high sec. |
|
Gizznitt Malikite
agony unleashed Agony Empire
4244
|
Posted - 2015.03.31 05:02:22 -
[51] - Quote
While I am not fully pleased with the numbers, I 100% agree that links need a MAJOR readjustment.
Frankly, they are way TOO POTENT, and CCP knows it. The last rebalancing pass they did on them was simply unacceptable, leaving them still way overpowered.
The only way to balance the field when fighting ships with links is to bring your own links, and that is simply pisspoor balancing!
|
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
240
|
Posted - 2015.03.31 05:54:13 -
[52] - Quote
I'd favour a solution, where ongrid boosts were more potent than offgrid boosts, however, offgrid boosting still worked.
ongrid boosts would be a little less powerful than today (yes, they are still too stronk). offgrid links would be only ~50% as effective as ongrid links.
Further adjustment would be needed ofc, like boosting ships being easily probed out and links not working near POS. The weapons timer thing would also be a neat way to expose boosting ships to danger. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1989
|
Posted - 2015.03.31 11:26:30 -
[53] - Quote
Reina Xyaer wrote: CCP has previously been wrong, lied, and/or pulled excuses out of their a*ses.
Someone pointed out in a thread recently...
Watchlist shows HP bars when a fleet member is On-grid....
And Watchlist does NOT show HP bars when a fleet member is Off-grid...
So... the code is there, no excuses.
Except Watchlist code is not the same as fleet boosting code. And is highly limited in the number it can apply to.
Also watch list works over 5000km with Grid Fu creating a mega grid.
So.... when you are a CCP coder working on Fleet boost coding, I'll believe you if you claim the code exists. Till such a time, quit talking out of... well, the same orifice you accuse CCP of using in fact. |
Tikktokk Tokkzikk
Alekhine's Gun The Periphery
207
|
Posted - 2015.04.19 02:19:07 -
[54] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Reina Xyaer wrote: CCP has previously been wrong, lied, and/or pulled excuses out of their a*ses.
Someone pointed out in a thread recently...
Watchlist shows HP bars when a fleet member is On-grid....
And Watchlist does NOT show HP bars when a fleet member is Off-grid...
So... the code is there, no excuses.
Except Watchlist code is not the same as fleet boosting code. And is highly limited in the number it can apply to. Also watch list works over 5000km with Grid Fu creating a mega grid. So.... when you are a CCP coder working on Fleet boost coding, I'll believe you if you claim the code exists. Till such a time, quit talking out of... well, the same orifice you accuse CCP of using in fact.
The watchlist code would be perfect for this. Too bad there's a limit to how many you can have on your watchlist. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
395
|
Posted - 2015.04.19 06:06:06 -
[55] - Quote
For everyone's information there's been an update on the back-end work for OGB changes :)
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5677008#post5677008 |
FT Cold
The Scope Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2015.04.19 07:06:31 -
[56] - Quote
Seems like it's going to improve congested systems too, big fights, tidi etc. |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
539
|
Posted - 2015.04.19 09:02:43 -
[57] - Quote
FT Cold wrote:Seems like it's going to improve congested systems too, big fights, tidi etc.
It won't hit big fights (once established) as much as congested systems, but it shouldGäó reduce the number of ships completely screwed over by server problems.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
396
|
Posted - 2015.04.19 10:19:02 -
[58] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:FT Cold wrote:Seems like it's going to improve congested systems too, big fights, tidi etc. It won't hit big fights (once established) as much as congested systems, but it shouldGäó reduce the number of ships completely screwed over by server problems.
If I recall correctly from the Command Ship changes (and ensuing talk about OGBs) they want to bring the level a Node can operate on down to a single grid, which improves parallelization and lets them take a massive Null fight that might be all over a single system and split it among multiple servers. I suspect this is one part of the reason behind the Sov capture Node event's design.
This has the happy side-effect of letting them confine boosts to a single Grid instead of everywhere in the system. |
Syrias Bizniz
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
399
|
Posted - 2015.04.19 10:59:34 -
[59] - Quote
Why don't we just take the HIC Bubble and change it a bit so it becomes the Command Sphere? (Doesn't need a visual tbh, maybe just a flag that indicates you're getting bonuses)
Change warp-strength-modifier to current fleet boost modifiers, adjust range of the module to be more adequate, and maybe add a script for obscene range but only on 1 target. 100mn Boosters, yay! (At least they're ongrid).
And maybe, but just maybe, keep the 'Disallows Assistance' attribute.
Edit: Or drop the range scripted single target one on purpose, so there is actually NO 100mn faggotry on links, just manly brawling command ships. |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
970
|
Posted - 2015.04.19 12:20:54 -
[60] - Quote
I really like the consoidation of links into fewer modules encouraging a combat fit CS, but those numbers are awfully weak. This would effectively cut down WL effectiveness to a tenth. THe boosts that'd give would be unnoticable, and no one would bother with links most of the time.
I mean: +600m disruptrange, +300m webrange, those things make a difference with two scramkiting frigates circling each other, but it's so weak a med neut on the CS might be better else. Armorresists before mindlink go up by 2.5%, yeah.
Seems like all this proposal does is eliminate the chance of multiple ongrid Boosters working together to field all desired links, to a single morale CS carrying all the links that would apply. In any fleet, everywhere. The best though: It wouldn't matter if you fly a CS or a CBC, nothing*1.15 is still nothing.
In my opinion, it would be cool if they were lowering link numbers towards the proposal for specialized links and then introduce T3 links that behave like those, significantly weaker but all-in-one and suitable to be fitted to boosting T3s in the smallest of gangs. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |