Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Clara Dunier
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 12:26:23 -
[1] - Quote
Just wanna ask some questions on where people stand when it comes to these 2 aspects...
How would you feel about OGB and logistics getting on killboards?
How would you feel about neutral boosting ships having the same repercussions as the current neutral logistics?
How do you feel about neutral people trying to repair ships in combat instead of getting suspect timers being changed to concord punishable offense?
There have been talks about these kinds of topics and just wanna see where the community that visits this page stands on when it comes to these questions.
Or would that probably kill 90% of the "leet pvp-ers" in high sec?
|
Noragen Neirfallas
Cheeki Breeki Corp Meet The Bandits.
849
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 13:06:20 -
[2] - Quote
Clara Dunier wrote:Just wanna ask some questions on where people stand when it comes to these 2 aspects...
How would you feel about OGB and logistics getting on killboards?
How would you feel about neutral boosting ships having the same repercussions as the current neutral logistics?
How do you feel about neutral people trying to repair ships in combat instead of getting suspect timers being changed to concord punishable offense?
There have been talks about these kinds of topics and just wanna see where the community that visits this page stands on when it comes to these questions.
Or would that probably kill 90% of the "leet pvp-ers" in high sec?
I think this should be a thing as soon as NPC corps become vulnerable to wardecs and wardecs follow people for the duration that was left paid on the Dec. This way nobody can escape the effects.
In short I to wish to propose inflammatory unrealistic content on the wrong forum for the express purpose of trolling
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Forum BFFL of Mo
|
Clara Dunier
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 13:17:17 -
[3] - Quote
In what manner is what I asked in any way unrealistic?
P.S. by implementing those changes you suggested "leet pvpers" would suffer as much as the next care bear cause all your neutral logistics, scouts, OGB, would all become valid targets. |
Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
566
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 13:30:56 -
[4] - Quote
OGB going suspect would just mean everyone would go back to flying T3s instead of command ships. They would go to safe, uncloak for boosts, then cloak up as soon as they weren't needed - just like everywhere else.
Neutral RR going criminal would just mean people would jump them in and out of alliance whenever they needed them. Worst case they stay in alliance permanently. Either case, they're still in use and all you removed was the advantage neutral logi provides to people who don't pay attention/mark known alts.
In both cases, your actual impact is almost zero. |
Noragen Neirfallas
Cheeki Breeki Corp Meet The Bandits.
849
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 13:31:34 -
[5] - Quote
Clara Dunier wrote:In what manner is what I asked in any way unrealistic?
P.S. by implementing those changes you suggested "leet pvpers" would suffer as much as the next care bear cause all your neutral logistics, scouts, OGB, would all become valid targets. I think everybody affected would manage on the 'leet PvPers' side of things
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Forum BFFL of Mo
|
Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
566
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 13:35:22 -
[6] - Quote
Clara Dunier wrote:In what manner is what I asked in any way unrealistic?
P.S. by implementing those changes you suggested "leet pvpers" would suffer as much as the next care bear cause all your neutral logistics, scouts, OGB, would all become valid targets.
All this would result in is people having more OGB characters and scouts, which they would cycle through as they were dec'd. Logi would probably just stay in alliance, which doesn't really hurt the merc/pvp groups (outside of the first engagement, or against idiots). |
Clara Dunier
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 13:40:13 -
[7] - Quote
Adriel Malakai wrote:OGB going suspect would just mean everyone would go back to flying T3s instead of command ships. They would go to safe, uncloak for boosts, then cloak up as soon as they weren't needed - just like everywhere else.
Neutral RR going criminal would just mean people would jump them in and out of alliance whenever they needed them. Worst case they stay in alliance permanently. Either case, they're still in use and all you removed was the advantage neutral logi provides to people who don't pay attention/mark known alts.
In both cases, your actual impact is almost zero.
Would still pose a chance of them getting scanned down and killed if they went suspect for the duration of them giving boosts, while as things stand now there are absolutely no risks of having an OGB in high sec.
If they jumped out of the war wouldn't that make then unable to join back in until the war is over thus reducing the power multiplier?
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1062
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 13:43:42 -
[8] - Quote
Clara Dunier wrote:Just wanna ask some questions on where people stand when it comes to these 2 aspects...
How would you feel about OGB and logistics getting on killboards?
How would you feel about neutral boosting ships having the same repercussions as the current neutral logistics?
How do you feel about neutral people trying to repair ships in combat instead of getting suspect timers being changed to concord punishable offense?
There have been talks about these kinds of topics and just wanna see where the community that visits this page stands on when it comes to these questions.
Or would that probably kill 90% of the "leet pvp-ers" in high sec?
1. On kb, sure they were in the fight so why not. 2. Sure. If they help, they should be wonkable. 3. Concord intervention - just no. Boosting is a legit game mechanic. Bring them into the fight and make them wonkable, but having concord do you work for you is a big NO GO. 4. It wouldn't kill 90% of leet pvp in HS. They will be put on gates, in stations and in safe spots. Command ships have crazy tanks and can last out an agression timer in most cases. The adaption process would be quite simple.
Taking them from off grid to on grid (I'm surprised you didn't prattle about that) would be a big game changer. You'd force them to give up some boosting abilities to fit a sturdy tank. Right now the combat immune boosters have very weak to zero tank and provide 6 or so boosts. On grid would just mean they have a tank and you use 3 tanked boosters instead of 1 untanked booster.
I'd like to see them on grid and able to be engaged personally.
Here's a typical fit now in the off grid mode: https://zkillboard.com/kill/41310469/ (this guy was orbitting a POS, but we were able to take it down before the guns were able to get a lock on us. )
Obviously bringing them on grid would change things up a bit.
|
Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
566
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 13:47:01 -
[9] - Quote
Clara Dunier wrote:Would still pose a chance of them getting scanned down and killed if they went suspect for the duration of them giving boosts, while as things stand now there are absolutely no risks of having an OGB in high sec.
If they jumped out of the war wouldn't that make then unable to join back in until the war is over thus reducing the power multiplier?
Sure, you'll still be able to get the random booster every now and again. But in most cases, it'll cloak/get out. Just like in low/null/wh.
When you leave a corp, you cannot rejoin it for either seven (7) days, or until all wars that were active at time of departure have expired, whichever comes first. It's important to note that this only applies to corps (why it's bolded), which means you can rejoin an alliance as many times as you like within this period, as long as their are sufficient corps. Each corp maintains its own timer.
For example, my alliance has seven corps. While we're at war, which we always are, my alts could join/drop once every single day for eternity, by rotating which corps they join. By the time they join/leave the seventh corp, the rejoin period of the first corp has expired, allowing them to rejoin my alliance. |
Clara Dunier
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 13:53:18 -
[10] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:Clara Dunier wrote:Just wanna ask some questions on where people stand when it comes to these 2 aspects...
How would you feel about OGB and logistics getting on killboards?
How would you feel about neutral boosting ships having the same repercussions as the current neutral logistics?
How do you feel about neutral people trying to repair ships in combat instead of getting suspect timers being changed to concord punishable offense?
There have been talks about these kinds of topics and just wanna see where the community that visits this page stands on when it comes to these questions.
Or would that probably kill 90% of the "leet pvp-ers" in high sec?
1. On kb, sure they were in the fight so why not. 2. Sure. If they help, they should be wonkable. 3. Concord intervention - just no. Boosting is a legit game mechanic. Bring them into the fight and make them wonkable, but having concord do you work for you is a big NO GO. 4. It wouldn't kill 90% of leet pvp in HS. They will be put on gates, in stations and in safe spots. Command ships have crazy tanks and can last out an agression timer in most cases. The adaption process would be quite simple. Taking them from off grid to on grid (I'm surprised you didn't prattle about that) would be a big game changer. You'd force them to give up some boosting abilities to fit a sturdy tank. Right now the combat immune boosters have very weak to zero tank and provide 6 or so boosts. On grid would just mean they have a tank and you use 3 tanked boosters instead of 1 untanked booster. I'd like to see them on grid and able to be engaged personally. Here's a typical fit now in the off grid mode: https://zkillboard.com/kill/41310469/ (this guy was orbitting a POS, but we were able to take it down before the guns were able to get a lock on us. ) Obviously bringing them on grid would change things up a bit.
I never meant boosters of becoming concordable, just the neutral RR ships that start repairing a ship that is in a fight.
I never mentioned about boosters becoming an on grid because that would for now be very bad for mostly null sec since they would most surely be primed which would result in them not being used for the most of the bigger engagements, unless CCP decides to give supers the links then I wouldn't see any problems of boosters boosting only ships that are on grid with them.
|
|
Clara Dunier
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 13:55:45 -
[11] - Quote
Adriel Malakai wrote:Clara Dunier wrote:Would still pose a chance of them getting scanned down and killed if they went suspect for the duration of them giving boosts, while as things stand now there are absolutely no risks of having an OGB in high sec.
If they jumped out of the war wouldn't that make then unable to join back in until the war is over thus reducing the power multiplier?
Sure, you'll still be able to get the random booster every now and again. But in most cases, it'll cloak/get out. Just like in low/null/wh. When you leave a corp, you cannot rejoin it for either seven (7) days, or until all wars that were active at time of departure have expired, whichever comes first. It's important to note that this only applies to corps (why it's bolded), which means you can rejoin an alliance as many times as you like within this period, as long as their are sufficient corps. Each corp maintains its own timer. For example, my alliance has seven corps. While we're at war, which we always are, my alts could join/drop once every single day for eternity, by rotating which corps they join. By the time they join/leave the seventh corp, the rejoin period of the first corp has expired, allowing them to rejoin my alliance.
I see your point, so maybe with the change of RR ships becoming concordable also extend the restrictions characters get from corps to alliances as well? |
Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
566
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 14:12:43 -
[12] - Quote
Clara Dunier wrote:I see your point, so maybe with the change of RR ships becoming concordable also extend the restrictions characters get from corps to alliances as well?
That would close the loophole.
The more important point here is why you want concord to do the work for you, when neutral logi can already be engaged by everyone. More importantly, having logi forced into alliance doesn't help you, as a defender - it actually just makes it more difficult for you to deal with them, since neutrals can't assist you.
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1062
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 14:29:44 -
[13] - Quote
Clara Dunier wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:Clara Dunier wrote:Just wanna ask some questions on where people stand when it comes to these 2 aspects...
How would you feel about OGB and logistics getting on killboards?
How would you feel about neutral boosting ships having the same repercussions as the current neutral logistics?
How do you feel about neutral people trying to repair ships in combat instead of getting suspect timers being changed to concord punishable offense?
There have been talks about these kinds of topics and just wanna see where the community that visits this page stands on when it comes to these questions.
Or would that probably kill 90% of the "leet pvp-ers" in high sec?
1. On kb, sure they were in the fight so why not. 2. Sure. If they help, they should be wonkable. 3. Concord intervention - just no. Boosting is a legit game mechanic. Bring them into the fight and make them wonkable, but having concord do you work for you is a big NO GO. 4. It wouldn't kill 90% of leet pvp in HS. They will be put on gates, in stations and in safe spots. Command ships have crazy tanks and can last out an agression timer in most cases. The adaption process would be quite simple. Taking them from off grid to on grid (I'm surprised you didn't prattle about that) would be a big game changer. You'd force them to give up some boosting abilities to fit a sturdy tank. Right now the combat immune boosters have very weak to zero tank and provide 6 or so boosts. On grid would just mean they have a tank and you use 3 tanked boosters instead of 1 untanked booster. I'd like to see them on grid and able to be engaged personally. Here's a typical fit now in the off grid mode: https://zkillboard.com/kill/41310469/ (this guy was orbitting a POS, but we were able to take it down before the guns were able to get a lock on us. ) Obviously bringing them on grid would change things up a bit. I never meant boosters becoming concordable, just the neutral RR ships that start repairing a ship that is in a fight. I never mentioned about boosters becoming an on grid because that would for now be very bad for mostly null sec since they would most surely be primed which would result in them not being used for the most of the bigger engagements, unless CCP decides to give supers the links then I wouldn't see any problems of boosters boosting only ships that are on grid with them.
Large null fights tend to use an erebus as their on grid booster. It's got crazy boosts and a reasonable tank. It would be a bit silly to have it sitting alone off grid somewhere. Null is equipped to deal with on grid boosting where a lot of HS folks are not. This change would have a big effect on HS and LS shinanigans and also WH - the smaller the engagement the larger the effect.
As far as CONCORD - they should not get involved in player conflicts. Providing consequences for suicide gankers - you bet. Boosts and reps - no. (flag these wankers and make the boosts be on grid, but leave concord out of it). Neutral reps are by default on grid and by default you can shoot them as soon as the get involved in the fight.
|
Clara Dunier
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 15:25:04 -
[14] - Quote
From the recent engagements between bigger alliances nowhere was a titan used as a booster. If the changes to boosters comes by having them be on grid to provide boosts null sec has the ability to field titans but doubt they would use them for that role. Maybe with the upcoming changes to super capitals they plan on making them something to fill a booster role but until then t3 and CS will continue to be more prudent, especially with the phoebe jump changes in effect.
Yes you are probably right, making it concordable would perhaps be to much. Just adding them both to kbs would solve the problem most likely. |
Noragen Neirfallas
Cheeki Breeki Corp Meet The Bandits.
850
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 16:21:43 -
[15] - Quote
I am about to live in low sec for the first time outside of eve uni so I exempt it due to lack of experience from the following. Each area of eve has its own unique style of gameplay and combat mechanics. Suspect mechanics are what makes high sec unique and the ability to utilize the mechanics of each area is what makes that area fun and different. While I agree with the 0 consequence for OGB is an issue the real issue you have with it is that you can't do anything about it. Since OGB do not actively (see targeted) assist the use of suspect would be inappropriate. Its a slippery slope and doesn't help with scouts neutral haulers etc. If you wish to alter mechanics for the OGB you must do it for the neutral hauler and scout too as both of these are taking as much part in the war as the OGB
In short there is a reason the line got drawn at active assistance
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Forum BFFL of Mo
|
Clara Dunier
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 16:52:55 -
[16] - Quote
OGB has a direct influence to the outcome of the fight and is a force multiplier and is giving those links to a target actively engaged in combat same as a RR ship giving his reps thus can be tagged as suspect in order to add risk to people that use them as neutral boosters.
Scouts or neutral haulers don't influence the fight and can't be considered force multipliers. |
Noragen Neirfallas
Cheeki Breeki Corp Meet The Bandits.
850
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 17:20:12 -
[17] - Quote
Clara Dunier wrote:OGB has a direct influence to the outcome of the fight and is a force multiplier and is giving those links to a target actively engaged in combat same as a RR ship giving his reps thus can be tagged as suspect in order to add risk to people that use them as neutral boosters.
Scouts or neutral haulers don't influence the fight and can't be considered force multipliers. Really? I would argue Intel is far greater then boosts. Your issue tho is really not ogb or reps imbalance. It's that you don't like the mechanics of highsec. Now if you spend some time on the issue you will see that the real issue is that ogb and reps can avoid wars utilizing the current mechanics. Just the same as a reshipping bowhead/orca or a neutral covops. Hell I can use my freighter pilot that practically has my name with impunity to ferry ships around as needed. Fixing one of these issues is not balancing it's catering to the Disney Land high sec ideal. I say make everybody vulnerable to wars. Problem solved
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Forum BFFL of Mo
|
Clara Dunier
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 18:11:35 -
[18] - Quote
Intel is valuable tool however doesn't affect the fight once the fight is started. OGB is actively participating in the fight and can be the difference between the fight being won or lost with no risk.
I don't have any issues as how hs is currently working, and you shouldnt make everybody vulnerable to wars cause that is just wrong on so many levels but that is not the topic and I'm not interested in that.
The questions I'm asking revolve around usage risk free OGB and neutral logistics to see opinions of the community that frequents this section of the forums cause in a sense it affects them probably the most. |
Noragen Neirfallas
Cheeki Breeki Corp Meet The Bandits.
850
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 18:32:50 -
[19] - Quote
Clara Dunier wrote:Intel is valuable tool however doesn't affect the fight once the fight is started. OGB is actively participating in the fight and can be the difference between the fight being won or lost with no risk.
I don't have any issues as how hs is currently working, and you shouldnt make everybody vulnerable to wars cause that is just wrong on so many levels but that is not the topic and I'm not interested in that.
The questions I'm asking revolve around usage risk free OGB and neutral logistics to see opinions of the community that frequents this section of the forums cause in a sense it affects them probably the most. You sir have no clue about how Intel and baiting works in high sec if you think Intel is not fluid and is not a constant factor in a good fight
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Forum BFFL of Mo
|
Adriel Malakai
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
567
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 18:43:53 -
[20] - Quote
Noragen Neirfallas wrote:You sir have no clue about how Intel and baiting works in high sec if you think Intel is not fluid and is not a constant factor in a good fight
The biggest difference is that OGB:
A) Have a far more easily measured impact. B) Are far more easily tweaked.
Intel is extremely valuable in every situation, but there is no easy way to really impact the ability to gather information that doesn't have other far-reaching and often bad implications (ie removing local). OGB can be easily impacted by giving them suspect for neutral boosts and/or forcing them on grid (250km boost range?), without making them entirely irrelevant. I'm not convinced that boosts are really a problem though, particularly in HS.
As far as RR goes, I've already made the point that GCC for them is extremely questionable and that doing so will hurt the groups who can't deal with RR more than anything.
|
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
394
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 20:12:44 -
[21] - Quote
OGB has already been discussed to death in FW subforum. I think it will eventually get looked at but it's not exactly #1 on CCP's priority list.
OGB needs to be on killboards. As far as lowsec goes the most common suggestion was a weapons timer so the booster can't immediately dock or jump systems if aggressed. Obviously this would be irrelevant for highsec as long as the booster has CONCORD protection. A suspect or LE timer would be required to make them vulnerable.
I'd love to see cloaky T3's used for boosting in highsec. Yes they are cloaked most of the time and still nigh unscannable but if you do managed to pinpoint one or catch it on a gate...they're generally paper tanked. One nado will solve that problem.
Forcing them on grid might actually cause people to use some fairly neat and under used ships (command ships) in their intended role which wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing. |
Cyclo Hexanol
The Dickwad Squad Slaver's Union
3
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 20:19:48 -
[22] - Quote
Clara Dunier wrote: Scouts or neutral haulers don't influence the fight and can't be considered force multipliers.
You have no idea how much of a tell this is that you haven't participated in hisec war seriously. Scouts are probably THE most important tool in your toolbox. You will generally have your main, train up a scout, and THEN if you think you can swing it train up links or cross train the scout into a link ship. Links won't help you when you jump into that 5 man T3 gate camp while a scout tells you about the exact degree of pain you are about to try and kill.
This is all fine as it is the difference between High/Low/Null/WH. In low you have to know and account for gate guns and pirate status in your fights to help determine the outcome and you have to worry about capitals somewhat (mostly carriers). In nullsec you don't have to worry about any of the gate gun mechanics but still have to consider aggression timers and the possibility of supers and caps dropping on you depending on where you are. Lastly in WHs you have to deal with caps, polarization, and lack of local.
These are all very different parts of space with very distinctive play styles. The way to succeed in lowsec is not the same in nullsec and we have seen this time and time again when nullseccers take a plunge into lowsec because of leaving an alliance or losing space. You will see them losing supers and such trying to grind down POCOs and lone sieged dreads on towers because you can get away with that in nullsec due to the emptiness. In essence, learn the play styles of the space you are going to fight in or travel through. But coming into the C&P forums and talking about possible changes to make one play style more like another that you do isn't really going to be recieved well.
I would highly recommend taking an alt and jumping into a wardec alliance in hisec just to see how different the game play really is. You will quickly realize that by the time you see your enemy (if they are competent) they have already been talking about you on comms for 5-10 minutes.
|
McChicken Combo HalfMayo
The Happy Meal
725
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 20:20:27 -
[23] - Quote
Clara Dunier wrote:The questions I'm asking revolve around usage risk free OGB and neutral logistics to see opinions of the community that frequents this section of the forums cause in a sense it affects them probably the most. Suspect flagged boosters would not be at risk like you're thinking. Every booster used outside of highsec is "suspect flagged". You either park your Command Ship well inside the undock ring or you put your cloaky T3 in a safe. The change you've proposed would have a far more drastic affect on fleet booster AWOXing than it would on neutral boosting repercussions. This inclines me to in fact support your suggestion, but purely for the luls.
Neutral logistics going criminal means no one can use neutral logistics effectively. Suicide Augorers? You'd get more bang for your buck dropping a suicide Catalyst on your target. The motivation here is understandable. The meta in highsec PVP has become that having friendly logi is usually a basic requirement even in 1v1 engagements. It's obnoxious, but this isn't the solution.
There are all our dominion
Gate camps: "Its like the lowsec watercooler, just with explosions and boose" - Ralph King-Griffin
|
Leto Thule
Origin. Black Legion.
2753
|
Posted - 2015.06.01 21:38:39 -
[24] - Quote
Boosters should get a yellow card (if neutral) and a weapons timer if member using their boosts become stressed.
Why should this be different from anything else in EVE in the aspect of risk vs reward? If you want the boosts, you should have to take the risks.
Holeysheet1 is afraid of thunderdome matches.
|
lord xavier
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
75
|
Posted - 2015.06.02 02:32:05 -
[25] - Quote
Cut OfGB to 50% of what they are now. Make OnGB slightly strong than now. Start using OnGB and force people to use OnGB if they want equal level. Boosting characters are not hard, especially if your main already flys command ships. You spend a few months training Armor/Skirmish or Shield/Skirmish or whatever, make yourself the OnGB.
Also, booster alts are not hard to train. I trained a scouting alt into one with minimal effort. Stop being terrible and complaining about boosts ALL the time. Just make a booster and get on the same level as many others have turned to over the last five years. I understand that this Off grid boosting is "destorying solo pvp." But I am sorry, I am around alot of lowsec space on a few different characters. Very little of eve truely solos in lowsec. Solo went away when people were not willing to lose, so they would bring more friends, or if they were in trouble they would scream for help and friends would come. Boosters didnt kill solo, greed over willingness to learn how to fly ships was what killed solo. "Everyone runs boosting alts, this is a problem!!" No its not and no they dont. Get better and stop thinking every loss you have is because someone is boosting. A lot of people do not actually boost, nor can they be bothered to bring links for a 2-7 man gang.
Highsec wardecs, HA. People dont go to solo stuff. They go to buff killboards. Hardly anyone war decs to push a group out of a system they want for some odd reason in an attempt at "High sec sov claim." or whatever.
Non-afflianted out of Corp/Alliance Logistics that repairs someone who is in a wardec - Give them GCC and make concord come blow them up in a 0.5 or higher. Give them a security hit in a 0.1-0.4. Make them stay in the corp/alliance with the wardeccers. |
Noragen Neirfallas
Cheeki Breeki Corp Meet The Bandits.
852
|
Posted - 2015.06.02 03:00:20 -
[26] - Quote
lord xavier wrote:Cut OfGB to 50% of what they are now. Make OnGB slightly strong than now. Start using OnGB and force people to use OnGB if they want equal level. Boosting characters are not hard, especially if your main already flys command ships. You spend a few months training Armor/Skirmish or Shield/Skirmish or whatever, make yourself the OnGB. Give them a suspect flag if boosting someone who becames strained. if they are out of the alliance/corporation who is engaged in the wardec (neutral boosts), give them GCC and have concord blow them up for aggressing outside of a wardec, since they are amplifying a persons ship who is aggressing, they are also helping in the aggression. So give them aggression as if I were shooting someone I am not wardecced against.
Also, booster alts are not hard to train. I trained a scouting alt into one with minimal effort. Stop being terrible and complaining about boosts ALL the time. Just make a booster and get on the same level as many others have turned to over the last five years. I understand that this Off grid boosting is "destorying solo pvp." But I am sorry, I am around alot of lowsec space on a few different characters. Very little of eve truely solos in lowsec. Solo went away when people were not willing to lose, so they would bring more friends, or if they were in trouble they would scream for help and friends would come. Boosters didnt kill solo, greed over willingness to learn how to fly ships was what killed solo. "Everyone runs boosting alts, this is a problem!!" No its not and no they dont. Get better and stop thinking every loss you have is because someone is boosting. A lot of people do not actually boost, nor can they be bothered to bring links for a 2-7 man gang.
Highsec wardecs, HA. People dont go to solo stuff. They go to buff killboards. Hardly anyone war decs to push a group out of a system they want for some odd reason in an attempt at "High sec sov claim." or whatever.
Non-afflianted out of Corp/Alliance Logistics that repairs someone who is in a wardec - Give them GCC and make concord come blow them up in a 0.5 or higher. Give them a security hit in a 0.1-0.4. Make them stay in the corp/alliance with the wardeccers. gcc is a terrible idea and you should feel terrible for agreeing with it. Stop saying NPC's do my work for me. You worded a HTFU post and set the concrete with your own tears.
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Forum BFFL of Mo
|
lord xavier
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
75
|
Posted - 2015.06.02 03:23:03 -
[27] - Quote
Noragen Neirfallas wrote: gcc is a terrible idea and you should feel terrible for agreeing with it. Stop saying NPC's do my work for me. You worded a HTFU post and set the concrete with your own tears.
I dont feel bad for ever suggesting a way to make station mercenaries lives harder. Though that was such an aggressive way of saying "No, I don't want people to actually know I have a booster sitting 1,000,000 km off the rens undock." or the neutral logistics in Naku, Uedama and Sivala. It's pretty hard to believe that any corporation or alliance doesn't use current game mechanics to the advantage such as neutral logistics or neutral boosters. So, change the mechanic, find new mechanics to put in your favor. I set it with my own tears huh? I guess I am just so jaded and crushed from my experiences in high sec with the unfair ability that you all have with neutral boosting alts over me. It is like everyone in high sec is just shooting at me.
Oh, right I forgot to express how mean and rude you are. I am going to go cry and uninstall eve while doubling all your isk while I leave in Jita. |
Leto Thule
Origin. Black Legion.
2755
|
Posted - 2015.06.02 03:24:56 -
[28] - Quote
This is a good time for me to say mining boosts should also yellow card the booster.
Holeysheet1 is afraid of thunderdome matches.
|
Noragen Neirfallas
Cheeki Breeki Corp Meet The Bandits.
853
|
Posted - 2015.06.02 03:46:53 -
[29] - Quote
Leto Thule wrote:This is a good time for me to say mining boosts should also yellow card the booster. TBH I'm all for everybody in the corp and/or fleet of any aggressor to go flashy. This would make for some fun and interesting (emergent) gameplay.
@ the other guy Also when I am in Rens my booster is on grid. My Reps are on grid. My secret is the ability to reship after being ship scanned so aggressors show up with all the wrong ships. It's amazing what swapping to a different fit on the same hull can achieve. Hell simply look in local all my ALT's are quite obvious. (hint check out my kill board to see similarities)
PS you won't find me in Rens (other then moving assets around) for the next 3 months or so
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Forum BFFL of Mo
|
Noragen Neirfallas
Cheeki Breeki Corp Meet The Bandits.
854
|
Posted - 2015.06.02 03:58:32 -
[30] - Quote
Oh to clarify at this point I agree that boosts in general are broken and need to be worked on. But as you may have noticed I also think a lot of High-Sec mechanics need a rework and singling one out without the others is silly. However getting a NPC to do ANYTHING a player currently does or should do is bad. I see the need for concord with suicide ganks (policing that ourselves would be impossible) but reps hell I have enough random rep boats on my main and alts boards to show that these can easily be dealt with by a properly prepared force. Whining about concord need to deal with them just shows your lack of preparation for the fight you wish to undertake.
Member and Judge of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Forum BFFL of Mo
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |