Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gevlin
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
118
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 14:39:00 -
[1] - Quote
At fan fest some dev mention a preference to have command ship command bonus requiring ships to be on grid.
My question are: With this not remove the Planet Hugging/Safe Spot hiding/POS staging Command ship or t3 cruiser which may have lesser of a tank? Will this not remove the role of the Combat Scanner Role in mega fleet fight that is to find out the location of these Ships? Will not change the Role of Command Bonus for Mining. Placing the Rorqual at the belt in Industrial mode? There for removing the need for a hauler at a belt. Due to the selection of ore coming out of the belts, the Rorqual has a hard time compressing ore unless it is at a POS with access to a corp hanger.
I am concerned about forcing a certain type play style over another.
May I recommend a compromise: Tech I Command modules can be off grid but Tech II Command Modules provide their Bonuses while on grid. I agree with several people: CCP needs to focus most of eve's recources on FIS, but the development of WIS still needs to continue, just as a slower and more efficient pace. In eve I wish to be more than just a machine. |
AraniFyr
Shadow State SpaceMonkey's Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 14:45:00 -
[2] - Quote
It should be on grid...too big of an advantage for such low risk |
E man Industries
SeaChell Productions
250
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 14:49:00 -
[3] - Quote
AraniFyr wrote:It should be on grid...too big of an advantage for such low risk Agreed, how ever command ships are primary....they need mor eof a buffer when boosting to exist on grid.
Need more-ádecent content a casual player can access in a 1-2h play period that is actually fun and contributes to long term personal and corp goals. This applies to PvE and PvP. |
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
118
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 14:52:00 -
[4] - Quote
How about a sig explosion when using boosters. Easier to scan down when you are putting out such massive electronic signals. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
45
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 15:04:00 -
[5] - Quote
E man Industries wrote:AraniFyr wrote:It should be on grid...too big of an advantage for such low risk Agreed, how ever command ships are primary....they need mor eof a buffer when boosting to exist on grid. How much did the biggest tank have again .. 1/4M+ EHP (Damnation)?
Some slight tweaking of numbers will be necessary as in all things, but most commands/T3s are perfectly capable of surviving on-grid NOW provided they don't insist on sporting a full rack of links .. spread the love (read: bring more than 1 uber link ship) and you have all the tank you'll ever need
|
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
3539
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 15:13:00 -
[6] - Quote
Off grid support.
I will only accept this if it came in a form of long range bombardment and you have a forward target painter for said defense cannon, and said cannont is not on the same grid as a starbase or outpost and unable to fire on targets on its grid.
Assests should be committed things should be dying more super cap deaths more tengu deaths. Things need to start dying in eve not profilitate more.
|
N3oXr2ii
the united Negative Ten.
9
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 15:14:00 -
[7] - Quote
whats wrong with it u can't cloak so u can be scnned down and if your at a pos soon as the gang jump out the bonuss are gone -áplease don't take out your real life issues out on me not my fault if your fat ugly bullied divorced broke or-á have a pimple thats big and red maybe your mom wants you out her basement or a jock has gave you a wedgie your flames only make me laff at your sadness your hidden tears are as juicy as the whiners i blob or the blobs i hide-áfrom |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
935
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 15:23:00 -
[8] - Quote
E man Industries wrote:AraniFyr wrote:It should be on grid...too big of an advantage for such low risk Agreed, how ever command ships are primary....they need mor eof a buffer when boosting to exist on grid.
I will second this. Command ships are too fragile when it comes to numbers, maybe command ships should be able to fit more than one of those famous adaptive modules that regulate ships resistances accordingly to dmg income that CCP Soundwave just mentioned?
I'm really excited because of this module and upcoming changes also for some modules (meta plates, plates drawbacks etcetera right?)
Anyway, off gridd bonus really need to be annihilated. Plus don't forget that on the field, if you fit the right modules (upcoming) once you're targeted by a certain number of ships they loose your lock Don't start wining before things are set in stone and even then, if this is a problem for off gridd tactics for solo or grieffing I say it's a nice decision. Learn to interact with more people instead of playing alone with your half dozen alts. |
Vertisce Soritenshi
Varion Galactic Tragedy.
1337
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 15:25:00 -
[9] - Quote
Fleet boosters belong on grid. Do whatever you have to do to balance them properly but they belong on grid. EvE is not about PvP.-á EvE is about the SANDBOX! - CCP!-á Open the door!!! |
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
118
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 15:37:00 -
[10] - Quote
I just remembered one of the new modules for anti blobs. The new module was to shake off any lock on yourself, and the more locks on you the better chance at disrupting all locks. Added way to shave off dps in inferno and upped survival chance if for at-least a little while longer of such ships. |
|
Talkietoaster
Orbital Manoeuvres in the Dark
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 15:38:00 -
[11] - Quote
How about phasing the booster effect?
The booster effect could be at 100% if on grid and and the boost would be decreased with distance from grid?
Just a thought. "Why don't we just break out the lasers?" --á"An excellent plan, sir, with only two minor drawbacks. One, we don't have a power source for the lasers; and two, we don't have any lasers. " http://gplus.to/talkietoastereve |
knobber Jobbler
Seniors Clan Get Off My Lawn
81
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 15:52:00 -
[12] - Quote
Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:I just remembered one of the new modules for anti blobs. The new module was to shake off any lock on yourself, and the more locks on you the better chance at disrupting all locks. Added way to shave off dps in inferno and upped survival chance if for at-least a little while longer of such ships.
We already have ecm burst modules. Has this been overlooked?! |
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
119
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 16:04:00 -
[13] - Quote
knobber Jobbler wrote: We already have ecm burst modules. Has this been overlooked?!
ECM burst is AOE and effects all locks of hit ships. This is a personal lock disruption. I'm assuming at any distance. |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
3540
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 16:06:00 -
[14] - Quote
I sorta like the 100% bonus for being on grid.
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
301
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 16:13:00 -
[15] - Quote
On-grid is fine but fitting requirements for links on T3s would need to be dropped so that the booster doesn't die to two 1400mm volleys with a remotely efficient link setup. Otherwise people would use command ships again to be able to use full racks of links while still having hundreds of thousands of EHP. Just because you're balancing something doesn't mean you have to make it practically useless. |
ElQuirko
Gravit Negotii Rogue Elements.
466
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 16:21:00 -
[16] - Quote
It should be on-grid only, but I agree this could lead to command ships being primaried. Therefore, they should have an increase of, say, 25% in the tank of command ships while engaging the boosters as well as the tank given by the boosters. While in small fights this could lead to having one tough nut to crack, in big fights it means that the 400+ alpha battleships don't just tear it to pieces in two volleys and so the logis have a little more time to react.
In the case of Gallente command ships, they just need a massive revamp.
If we distribute pictures of people, does that mean God can file copyright claims under SOPA? |
snake pies
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
7
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 16:38:00 -
[17] - Quote
nerf em |
5n4keyes
Sacred Templars RED.OverLord
10
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 16:51:00 -
[18] - Quote
A better option should be, whilst on grid, you get a bonus to the bonus you give, eg, at POS you give 15% on grid you give 18%.
Either that, or allow Command ships to fit 7 links and a tank =P |
Aiwha
101st Space Marine Force Nulli Secunda
264
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 16:55:00 -
[19] - Quote
E man Industries wrote:AraniFyr wrote:It should be on grid...too big of an advantage for such low risk Agreed, how ever command ships are primary....they need mor eof a buffer when boosting to exist on grid.
The Damnation is a prime example of how a CS should be build, like a motherfucking tank. Give the other CS's bonuses to their tanking as well, AND nerf off grid bonuses. Regards,
LCpl. Aiwha-á Senior Recruiter |
Talkietoaster
Orbital Manoeuvres in the Dark
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 21:02:00 -
[20] - Quote
I could imagine something like this
- on grid: no nerf - on safe spot: little nerf - near own POS: medium nerf - near Station / Gate: considerable nerf "Why don't we just break out the lasers?" --á"An excellent plan, sir, with only two minor drawbacks. One, we don't have a power source for the lasers; and two, we don't have any lasers. " http://gplus.to/talkietoastereve |
|
Gevlin
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
118
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 21:17:00 -
[21] - Quote
Command ships and T3 Cruisers are not the only ships to be talking about
Battle Cruisers Orca Rorqual Carriers Super Carriers Titans
Some ships have bonus but others don't. Some ships like the Rorqual should not be on grid as it has to be in In Industrial Mode (5 minute cycles) at the belt is Scary as Crap, and null sec is not a nice place to leave capital ship stuck in seige mode at a belt with out substantial support! Unlike a dread a Rorqual needs to be out there for the full 3 hours to get the task done for a mining op, where a dreadnaught it out in a spot for a fraction of the time to kill what it needs and adding more combat dreads to the targets speeds up the process. And a person has a tough time compressing with out access to storage unit to pick up and compress and deposit from.
Oh! and trying to get Tactical support for a mining op is hopeless. The rats don't spawn enough to keep any PVE player occupied and they begin to get board and either leave or start shooting the miners.
If this proposal goes though the Rorqual boosting needs a SERIOUS re design. I would recommend a 25% flat cut from the Module effecting those off the grid.
This game needs to be more than just Group weapons Primary f1! Does now one know how to scan down a ship anymore?
At least with Battle Cruisers you can hide the booster with in the fleet of Battle cruisers. The orca simply warps off the field with the miners if trouble shows up. Carriers - just hide in the blob of carriers when repairing Super Carriers, and Titan well we see how they work and they will have a sub cap fleet to support them since they are all on the same PVP or Structure Goal! I agree with several people: CCP needs to focus most of eve's recources on FIS, but the development of WIS still needs to continue, just as a slower and more efficient pace. In eve I wish to be more than just a machine. |
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
502
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 21:31:00 -
[22] - Quote
lulz
Whiners whine when they can apply the same tactics against their enemy.
They chose to not put a command ship off grid, they lose, so its the fault of the other guy.
Yeah, that makes so much sense.
To bad you can still probe them out, can catch them on the gates if you don't suck and if you don't...yeah you deserve to lose to the gang facing you. To bad, you can't ******* just leave the system and set up an ambush on the next gate...lets not forget that you don't even have to face the enemy at all so you can just pick up your ball and go home (<- means go find explodey action elseware). Risk means you have to be eyeball to daddy bag and all oiled up now I guess, to bad risk could also mean using your own command ship off grid.
Worst idea ever, limit on grid. To bad it only takes alpha and primary targets to counter that suggetion + the fact the lock idea will probably have a limit on how often it can like the Micro Jump drive (every 2 freaking minutes, boring inbetween uses) be used so its not abused like a red headed step child and the command ship will still just die . |
Arsedestroyer
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 21:58:00 -
[23] - Quote
Aqriue wrote:lulz
Whiners whine when they can apply the same tactics against their enemy.
They chose to not put a command ship off grid, they lose, so its the fault of the other guy.
Yeah, that makes so much sense.
To bad you can still probe them out, can catch them on the gates if you don't suck and if you don't...yeah you deserve to lose to the gang facing you. To bad, you can't ******* just leave the system and set up an ambush on the next gate...lets not forget that you don't even have to face the enemy at all so you can just pick up your ball and go home (<- means go find explodey action elseware). Risk means you have to be eyeball to daddy bag and all oiled up now I guess, to bad risk could also mean using your own command ship off grid.
Worst idea ever, limit on grid. To bad it only takes alpha and primary targets to counter that suggetion + the fact the lock idea will probably have a limit on how often it can like the Micro Jump drive (every 2 freaking minutes, boring inbetween uses) be used so its not abused like a red headed step child and the command ship will still just die .
What fricking noob still uses a CS as an offgrid booster? You use a T3, fit it to be closely to unprobable, set up your directional scan appropriately and scan for probes - once you catch one on scan, you switch safespots.
As for being caught on gates - yeah - what fricking failure loses a cov ops cloaked, interdiction nullified T3 on a gate?
If it's a home system, you won't need all that crap as you just park it in pos shields.
Not sure if really bad troll or seriously dumb.
Gevlin has a point though... |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
3545
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 22:07:00 -
[24] - Quote
Tech 3 commands are getting toned down Arse keep up wtih the conversation.
|
Simetraz
State War Academy Caldari State
174
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 22:24:00 -
[25] - Quote
Command Links give good bonuses but they have never been overpowered.
You already can't warp with the things on, and one more nerf and you might as well just remove the links all together.
Off course you could remove certain links and build them into the ship as bonuses and change the ship requirements accordingly.
THen make those ships have to be on grid.
At leat then you could be something more then a moving target.
|
Arsedestroyer
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 22:25:00 -
[26] - Quote
Nova Fox wrote:Tech 3 commands are getting toned down Arse keep up wtih the conversation.
Sounds good - got a link? |
non judgement
Without Fear Flying Burning Ships Alliance
750
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 22:36:00 -
[27] - Quote
I don't see a problem with them sitting off grid. If both sides use them then the fight should be even.
Why mess with my play style? Isn't this game a sandbox?
Jest aside. I do actually use ganglinks while on grid. But I hardly do any pvp. I don't see why you wouldn't have a ganglink ship on grid in small gangs. Large fleets I'm guessing that both sides would have similar gang boosting. You guys must be talking about medium sized gangs?
Edit: If I was taking a rorq on a mining op. I'd like to put up a small tower for it to sit in during the mining op. Having one sit out in the open could be bad. Have you seen the price of them now? I might start building them. Lucky that I already own one. |
Revii Lagoon
The Foreign Legion Test Alliance Please Ignore
25
|
Posted - 2012.03.26 22:42:00 -
[28] - Quote
Talkietoaster wrote:I could imagine something like this - near Station / Gate: considerable nerf
Oh god that would be horrible considering the vast majority of fights are fought on gates. |
Talkietoaster
Orbital Manoeuvres in the Dark
1
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 20:30:00 -
[29] - Quote
Okay, never mind :-), in that case base the nerf factor purely on distance from grid or would you prefer no bonus at all when off grid ? "Why don't we just break out the lasers?" --á"An excellent plan, sir, with only two minor drawbacks. One, we don't have a power source for the lasers; and two, we don't have any lasers. " http://gplus.to/talkietoastereve |
Severian Carnifex
115
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 20:33:00 -
[30] - Quote
don't nerf off grid boosting. BOOST ON GRID BOOSTING. |
|
Hayaishi
Aperture Harmonics K162
63
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 20:35:00 -
[31] - Quote
Imo, the bonuses should be at 50% strength when off grid, and full strength on grid.
This way it's not all or nothing, but actually allows for game play variance. |
Markus Reese
Debitum Naturae ROMANIAN-LEGION
36
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 20:37:00 -
[32] - Quote
Aiwha wrote:E man Industries wrote:AraniFyr wrote:It should be on grid...too big of an advantage for such low risk Agreed, how ever command ships are primary....they need mor eof a buffer when boosting to exist on grid. The Damnation is a prime example of how a CS should be build, like a motherfucking tank. Give the other CS's bonuses to their tanking as well, AND nerf off grid bonuses.
Command ship pilot here, I hate off grid boosting, I like to be on field.
First off, they are strong, cannot be doomsdays, really tough to alpha 300k ehp off the field, and with all +80% resists, you are not going to break any logistics on it.
Moreso, what might be needed is a midpoint command ship to bridge the mass fleet and the cap blob. Ganglink carriers do work. A different link battleship would help in the +100 fleet subcap fights.
I agree with Aiwha on the subject of more tank for the other CS. The passive regen needs to be fixed in order to allow vulture to get it's neede EHP. It runs a bit over 150k, not quite as good resists and has to have a huge sig size to do so.
The T3 are supposed to be multrole hull, however when a safespot or a pos exist, they will outboost the commships. Tank doesn't matter when nothing can shoot at it. |
Rico Minali
Sons Of 0din Fatal Ascension
434
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 20:39:00 -
[33] - Quote
Command ships should give better bonuses than the do it all T3s anyway, and yes command linking ships should be on grid with their fleet. Trust me, I almost know what I'm doing. |
adopt
Enlightened Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
333
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 20:42:00 -
[34] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:E man Industries wrote:AraniFyr wrote:It should be on grid...too big of an advantage for such low risk Agreed, how ever command ships are primary....they need mor eof a buffer when boosting to exist on grid. How much did the biggest tank have again .. 1/4M+ EHP (Damnation)? Some slight tweaking of numbers will be necessary as in all things, but most commands/T3s are perfectly capable of surviving on-grid NOW provided they don't insist on sporting a full rack of links .. spread the love (read: bring more than 1 uber link ship) and you have all the tank you'll ever need
1.1 million EHP Proteus \thread Shadoo > Always remember to fit Cynosural Field Generator I, have 450 Liquid Ozone in your cargo and convo a friendly Pandemic Legion member if you have a capital or super capital ship tackled.
FREE XOLVE ~ THE HERO TEST NEEDS |
Vertisce Soritenshi
Varion Galactic Tragedy.
1368
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 20:42:00 -
[35] - Quote
Nerf them...nerf them HARD! EvE is not about PvP.-á EvE is about the SANDBOX! - CCP!-á Open the door!!! |
Neddy Fox
FireStar Inc Curatores Veritatis Alliance
6
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 21:31:00 -
[36] - Quote
Also FC/Command ship pilot here.
I was at all ship balance meetings, and raised the issues/questions about these ships.
IMO a T2 Command ship should be well tanked (EOS BUFF) , but also the T3 need some love after they get nerfed :
Drop the command processor requirement, and make them viable on grid, since that's not possible now. They need the same tank as a normal CS.
Points noted :
-CS will have 2 racial boosts / bonusses, 5% per level -T3 will have 4 racial boosts / bonusses , 3% per level
Boosts on grid will be BETTER then offgrid; it still will give a bonus, but not as much.
Rorquals will NOT require to be on grid.
Titans where not mentioned, would be nice to get a statement from the devs here. Do they need to be on grid for max bonus as well?
The damnation is fine as is; IMO a normal tanked / painter Damnation tanks already over 400k EHP, the rest of these ships should have the same.. Make them HARD to kill, but of course not impossible; I guess a Mael Alpha fleet can do it instantly, but even then it should be hard.
ATM a damnation is normally never primary; a Vulture or Claymore dies way faster, and the Eos is just a joke; get them up to par.
And yes, on grid boosting ftw.
Also : atm a loki is STILL unscannable with max skills, t2 warfare links (sig radius). It's the only one though, so CCP check the hard cap on this.. (Tried with maxxed out probing alt with prospectors, sitting next to the loki, max result was 88%) |
Kattshiro
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
28
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 21:36:00 -
[37] - Quote
Talkietoaster wrote:How about phasing the booster effect?
The booster effect could be at 100% if on grid and and the boost would be decreased with distance from grid?
Just a thought.
This is what I was in favor of.
But really if you dont fit a full rack of Co -pro, and cmd mods you can in fact fit a nasty tank... And heaven forbid shoot at something with remaining highs...or neut em might be more effective. |
Markus Reese
Debitum Naturae ROMANIAN-LEGION
36
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 21:41:00 -
[38] - Quote
Neddy Fox wrote:Much excellent info, appreciated
That is all very cool info, /signed on it all. I found that a single link T3 was fairly effective, but not as a mass fleet fight. I always used the T3 during corp explorations and wormholes to support low mass and maneuverable fleets. The one part I am not sure I follow is the #boosts/bonuses. Does that mean command ships would only fit two links or does it mean they get two different racial boosts able to be applied? |
SmilingVagrant
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
150
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 21:41:00 -
[39] - Quote
I'm fine with them being on grid. Our FC's have been on grid with them on a fairly regular basis, provided you have decent logi and the enemy isn't using proper alpha tactics (No one in game does to date) it shouldn't be too much of an issue. A few of our FC's fight from command ships, they are watch-listed and several of the logi have then pre-locked.
We generally only lose them if we lose the engagement in general. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
556
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 21:48:00 -
[40] - Quote
i'll make you a deal I'll support off-grid boosters if I can shoot ships that are off-grid what's fair is fair |
|
YUMAD BRO
Aliastra Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 21:56:00 -
[41] - Quote
I have a great Idea....
How about you fking train it up on a char like everyone else and do it to??
you Fkn Downy..
LOLOLOLOLOLOL |
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
53
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 22:02:00 -
[42] - Quote
I think removing off grid boosting will hurt more than it will help and puts too much advantage in the fleet that is already on grid. I know that an off grid booster upsets people but its the only way to insure level playing field. If he's sitting in a pos, oh well, take the pos down. If he's in space scan him down and find him. Even if you don't point him, he must warp and as command mods turn off in warp so the boosters are off also. So task organize your attack and neutralize his boosters. Bring your own boosters to help too, whatever. Everyone has the same ability to boost in a system, but having to be on grid gives ridiculous advantage to the first on grid (defense) and especially to the already too prevalent kiting fleets.
Example, my fleet is trying to catch one or multiple targets in system. Perhaps baiting, perhaps utilizing a warp in from a cloaky. Once the scan is achieved the tackler goes in. I have interdiction manuevers and rapid deployment on. When the tackler arrives we might get the point and lock him down, but only if he's not already aligned. If he stays and is kiting still, the rapid deployment and interdiction maneuvers might give the extra boost needed to get the scram and web in what would otherwise fail to reach as they burn out of range. I cannot accompany him into the fight until the target is locked because I cannot boost while in warp. If I have to wait until I pop on grid, target is probably gone as my warp speed is slower. if we fleet warp, then its the slowest warp speed ship to the fleet and that negates the warp in to a large extent due to the target having already moved too far already. Part of the power of the interceptor isn't just mwd speed but warp speed too. If he's tied to my warp speed that scan lock is now worthless as the targets now too far away. If we do it right, once the target is locked down then I bring my Mrym in and help with the kill, and turn boosts back on, but I only do this once I know the target/ targets are fully locked down.
If I couldn't do this, then even more targets would just endlessly warp off/burn away and get away/win. Often a target will stay on grid and not warp away thinking he can win with just some little tackler on grid with him. What do you think will happen if I bring in my BC, or a T3 or a command ship. Instant running like 90% of people do already. Plus, often we are trying to do multiple things in the system, like block more than one gate at a time. Now I can't boost system wide. Why bother flying it then? Instead of seeing more command ships/command modules etc, you'll see less. Nothing but endless canes and drakes. Vanilla.
In other applications, the fleet already on grid will have their boosts running and when the attacking fleet arrives, they may not show up all at once (sure preferred but when warping in at optimals, different ships will arrive due to different warp speeds.) You'll have to wait for boosting ships to arrive and then some of the key boosts such as info and skirmish might already be too late - as certain ships have already been jammed or escaped due to boosts/lack there of.
Finally, on grid is too squishy. I mean you can play grid fu all day long and exploit the grid to your favor to isolate boosters from the combat fleet if your clever. Again, favoring the defense.
The best way to keep it relatively fair is system wide. Sure, they can have a pos, but you know what? You rate some advantage for having a POS. Burn it down, bring your own boosts, whatever. Them being in a pos doesn't negate you bringing your boosts. Being on grid only denies the attacker too many options. |
Varesk
Mafia Redux Black Legion.
36
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 22:24:00 -
[43] - Quote
Talkietoaster wrote:I could imagine something like this
- near own POS: medium nerf - near Station / Gate: considerable nerf
Lets take a look at these two.
My POS is under attack, my command ship would be nerfed while trying to defend my tower. Jump into a system, on no i am at a gate, there goes the command ship bonuses.
Command ships and t3s should be on grid.
no grid = no bonus.
|
Doddy
Excidium. Executive Outcomes
39
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 22:25:00 -
[44] - Quote
Gevlin wrote:At fan fest some dev mention a preference to have command ship command bonus requiring ships to be on grid.
My question are: With this not remove the Planet Hugging/Safe Spot hiding/POS staging Command ship or t3 cruiser which may have lesser of a tank? Will this not remove the role of the Combat Scanner Role in mega fleet fight that is to find out the location of these Ships? Will not change the Role of Command Bonus for Mining. Placing the Rorqual at the belt in Industrial mode? There for removing the need for a hauler at a belt. Due to the selection of ore coming out of the belts, the Rorqual has a hard time compressing ore unless it is at a POS with access to a corp hanger.
I am concerned about forcing a certain type play style over another.
May I recommend a compromise: Tech I Command modules can be off grid but Tech II Command Modules provide their Bonuses while on grid.
The only one of these questions that remotely valid is the rorqual tbh. SS hugging t3 bonus givers are the problem. The combat scanner role needs to be on grid with the ships it providing gang warp for anyway. Cs don't have a weak tank (they often have very strong tanks) and neither do single link t3s
|
Skogen Gump
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
6
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 22:27:00 -
[45] - Quote
I've got no problem nerfing off-grid bonuses ...
... for field command ships.
Fleet command ships though, no way - they're designed to work out of combat. |
Doddy
Excidium. Executive Outcomes
39
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 22:28:00 -
[46] - Quote
Skogen Gump wrote:I've got no problem nerfing off-grid bonuses ...
... for field command ships.
Fleet command ships though, no way - they're designed to work out of combat.
um what?
|
Kattshiro
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
28
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 22:33:00 -
[47] - Quote
So much of the sentiment for keeping off grid is because they might get shot...?
Isn't that the point? Every other ship in the fleet can get shot why not ships that provide bonuses exactly? Cause they help? So do logi's...
Heaven forbid you have to change tactics.
Furthermore the excuse "Everyone does it." Doesn't mean it shouldn't change or that it's not Bullshit. Guess everyone will have to bring the ship on grid to get the bonus then won't they? What happened to the l33t pvp "risk v. reward" mentality? Furthermore you shouldn't have to POS bash to get one ship... That's the most ******** reason i've heard all today.
|
Drew Solaert
University of Caille Gallente Federation
99
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 22:36:00 -
[48] - Quote
How is an a pro 1v1 pvper going to work if you can't have your off grid booster! Shock Horror! For every player ship that blows up, the wheels of the economy turn slightly faster. -áDo your bit today. -áGo out and PEW.
|
Markus Reese
Debitum Naturae ROMANIAN-LEGION
37
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 22:37:00 -
[49] - Quote
For the people who say boosters need to stay offgrid, will get agressive on the matter.
I ****ing dont. I put up my CS front lines where it belongs. I dont subscribe and spend the time and isk to play whee spin the ship in shields. I show up, I expect to die in glorious fire, I do not because I focus on my positioning, the FC orders and know when to GTFO and bounce back to keep myself alive. Is awesome. |
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
53
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 22:39:00 -
[50] - Quote
Drew Solaert wrote:How is an a pro 1v1 pvper going to work if you can't have your off grid booster! Shock Horror!
You fleet up with him and are in the same squad. then you know your opponent gets no boosts. Seems simple for an arranged 1v1. |
|
EnslaverOfMinmatar
BRAPELILLE MACRO BOT MINERS
24
|
Posted - 2012.03.27 22:42:00 -
[51] - Quote
Remove the ability to fit command links on T3. Every EVE player must read this http://www.eveonline.com/background/potw/default.asp?cid=29-01-07 or uninstall and DIAF |
Reaver Glitterstim
Resurrected Darkness
74
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 05:11:00 -
[52] - Quote
E man Industries wrote:AraniFyr wrote:It should be on grid...too big of an advantage for such low risk Agreed, how ever command ships are primary....they need mor eof a buffer when boosting to exist on grid. Buffer comes from mid and low slots, and fleet command ships have the best tanks of any subcap (as far as I'm aware). People just need to learn not to fit so many gang assists that they can't run their capacitor. After all, if the ship is fit for tank, it won't have any command processors, so it should only have 3 gang assists.
I think the problem is that people have been enjoying easy command for too long, and you're all squishy now. HTFU -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |
Parsee789
Immaterial and Missing Power
74
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 05:21:00 -
[53] - Quote
How will you make this work?
Imagine you're in a system where you have different parts of the fleet in different areas of the system.
With the requirement of On-Grid boosting the fleet commander will have be on-grid with one group while the rest receive no bonuses.
In order for boosts to be given to everywhere you will now need several times more leadership players to give everyone boosts.
This requirement for On-grid boosting will simply hurt more than it helps.
This will make the application of Boosts more complex and Cluttered.
This will simply make applying boosts a real big hassle when you're dealing with fleets that are scattered around the system, all doing different things.
How are you gonna fix this without requiring more leadership characters and bigger blobs. |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong White-Lotus
493
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 05:28:00 -
[54] - Quote
My question are:
Quote:With this not remove the Planet Hugging/Safe Spot hiding/POS staging Command ship or t3 cruiser which may have lesser of a tank?
yes, yes it will. And it will be a better game for it. Just go into battle with the new target breaker module. I'm sure you'll get targeted by a TON of ships.
Quote:Will this not remove the role of the Combat Scanner Role in mega fleet fight that is to find out the location of these Ships?
yes, yes it will, thank god. how can something off the battlefield get to have an effect? so stupid. if you want that kind of gameplay it should be tied to structures that give allied players system wide combat bonuses. Then you can have a small fleet hunting down what's been giving bonuses, kill it, and return to battle. There might even be some small scale warfare going on while the large battle happens over these deployable, system wide command modules.
Note, these would be placed like POS turrets, outside of the shields.
Other wise, hunting down a tiny, moving Tech 3 ship, that in no way could be able to have an effect on a huge battle it can't see, is not fun. It's stupid and should be on the field so that it can apply bonuses.
Quote:Will not change the Role of Command Bonus for Mining. Placing the Rorqual at the belt in Industrial mode? There for removing the need for a hauler at a belt. Due to the selection of ore coming out of the belts, the Rorqual has a hard time compressing ore unless it is at a POS with access to a corp hanger.
so then the ship will have to be used the way it was designed.
or upgrade the systems mining at the hub by mining more.
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong White-Lotus
493
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 05:29:00 -
[55] - Quote
Parsee789 wrote:How will you make this work?
Imagine you're in a system where you have different parts of the fleet in different areas of the system.
With the requirement of On-Grid boosting the fleet commander will have be on-grid with one group while the rest receive no bonuses.
In order for boosts to be given to everywhere you will now need several times more leadership players to give everyone boosts.
This requirement for On-grid boosting will simply hurt more than it helps.
This will make the application of Boosts more complex and Cluttered.
This will simply make applying boosts a real big hassle when you're dealing with fleets that are scattered around the system, all doing different things.
How are you gonna fix this without requiring more leadership characters and bigger blobs.
People all have been proposing nerfing boosts to grid without providing a way to properly balancing the nerf.
You propose things that are convenient to you, you don't think ahead of the consequences that it will make.
Actually I'm all for making it so if you're more than 150km away you don't even get bonuses. |
Parsee789
Immaterial and Missing Power
75
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 05:39:00 -
[56] - Quote
MotherMoon wrote: Actually I'm all for making it so if you're more than 150km away you don't even get bonuses.
You did not answer my question. What If I had a fleet who were spread through different Areas of the entire system. Areas that are separated in terms of AU rather than km.
What if my fleet was defending multiple poses? 150km is certainly not enough to cover that distance.
How are you going to handle that? |
Markus Reese
Debitum Naturae ROMANIAN-LEGION
46
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 05:52:00 -
[57] - Quote
MotherMoon wrote:Actually I'm all for making it so if you're more than 150km away you don't even get bonuses.
This idea not in favor of, having a specific range. I have been in larger combats where the fleets spread out a fair bit but still on grid. Start doing bounces around bubbles and poses, ranges can easily exceed that.
For Parsee about the spread fleet, in that case, that would be a risk for splitting the fleet up, or you set up more planning in the wings. No bonus or partial bonus, I just want an advantage for putting commship onto the field. |
Parsee789
Immaterial and Missing Power
75
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 05:56:00 -
[58] - Quote
Markus Reese wrote:MotherMoon wrote:Actually I'm all for making it so if you're more than 150km away you don't even get bonuses. This idea not in favor of, having a specific range. I have been in larger combats where the fleets spread out a fair bit but still on grid. Start doing bounces around bubbles and poses, ranges can easily exceed that. For Parsee about the spread fleet, in that case, that would be a risk for splitting the fleet up, or you set up more planning in the wings. No bonus or partial bonus, I just want an advantage for putting commship onto the field.
With current 0.0 fleet doctrines, your commandship will die within a blink of an eye. Even Carriers get alpha striked by a fleet these days, hence one of the very reasons why supercarriers are used as logistics rather than normal carriers.
How can you make it so without giving the Commandship have an ehp bigger than capitals? |
Valleria Darkmoon
Parsec Flux
15
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 05:57:00 -
[59] - Quote
The problem with forcing gang boosters to be on grid is that it is completely to the benefit of large blobs who are in little need of the force multiplier. The larger the blob the easier it is to hide or protect your booster in the middle of the field. It's not hard to imagine what a single motionless Loki is doing 250km off the fight with only 6 guys on grid is it?
I would suggest the following instead have the effectiveness of links degrade as more and more fleet members tap into it and the booster ship itself would be excluded from this count. Maybe have the links degrade by 2% of their effect for each person beyond the booster down to a minimum of 20% effective.
For example: -I have a 6 man gang, one gang booster. 5 ships are using the links so they degrade by 10% making the links 90% effective on the other 5.
-I have a 40 man fleet, one fleet booster. 39 ships are using the links so they degrade by 78% and are 22% effective on the entire fleet.
-I have a 400 man armada, one fleet booster. 399 ships are using the links so they degrade by 80% to their minimum and are 20% effective on the fleet.
If you want better links you should be able to add in more squad boosters boosting only 10 ships and you will get 80% effect but you will obviously need many more of them to pull it off. The advantage is a slight levelling on the field as in no case is the booster ever required to be on grid but (as Loki links are the ones I see most often) the speed advantage goes to the 6 man-gang who needs it more than the 400 man armada. At the same time are you really going to say we have so many guys that I don't even want the small boost we'll get by putting a Loki in fleet? It also makes some kind of sense from a purely fiction standpoint. The more of you there are tapping into the boosting ship's systems the more you strain it and the benefit decreases. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Resurrected Darkness
74
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 06:06:00 -
[60] - Quote
Parsee789 wrote:What If I had a fleet who were spread through different Areas of the entire system. You could designate squad boosters, just a suggestion. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |
|
Markus Reese
Debitum Naturae ROMANIAN-LEGION
46
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 06:07:00 -
[61] - Quote
Parsee789 wrote:
With current 0.0 fleet doctrines, your commandship will die within a blink of an eye. Even Carriers get alpha striked by a fleet these days, hence one of the very reasons why supercarriers are used as logistics rather than normal carriers.
How can you make it so without giving the Commandship have an ehp bigger than capitals?
Not as easy as you might think. Command ships used to be vulnerable because they could be hit by the doomsdays. Back then, I would agree. However since the DD cannot instapop, it is more moot. Now the task of hp. it is often overlooked, but carriers can make effective link ships. Not the supercarriers, but normal ones. The ehp and resists can be made high, co processors are not a big deal. The only tough part is that they are not usable unless capfleets are deployed. But then risk it getting popped if supercaps on the field, but supercaps can link too, is a tough cycle.
The only time it really becomes an issue is when the fleets exceed about 150 subcaps in a slugfest, then the commship is at risk. At that point, believe me, I am on my toes, I am always aligned with hostiles only showing and dilligently watching ranges. It they start closing in, I start bouncing, but that is the damnation, and the weakness of the vulture. Damnation can keep moving to avoid fight. If logi gets on a damnation, it isn't going down.
The vulture suffers from sig and not having the same comparable ehp. To that effect, it is at a huge disadvantage. However, the microjump drives could change that. Allowing the vulture to jump around on grid and maintain a long sniper range.
Still need our flagships though. 2 link T2 battleships please. I want my khanid abaddon. Especially if we are getting missiles soon :3 |
Parsee789
Immaterial and Missing Power
76
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 06:09:00 -
[62] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Parsee789 wrote:What If I had a fleet who were spread through different Areas of the entire system. You could designate squad boosters, just a suggestion.
The problem you suggest is no longer about having a booster, but now instead how many boosters you have. For each squadron you will need a ganglink ship and boosting character. This will make providing boosts more cluttered and annoying.
The battle will become all about who has the most boosters.
Is that what you really want?
Markus Reese wrote:Parsee789 wrote:
With current 0.0 fleet doctrines, your commandship will die within a blink of an eye. Even Carriers get alpha striked by a fleet these days, hence one of the very reasons why supercarriers are used as logistics rather than normal carriers.
How can you make it so without giving the Commandship have an ehp bigger than capitals?
Not as easy as you might think. Command ships used to be vulnerable because they could be hit by the doomsdays. Back then, I would agree. However since the DD cannot instapop, it is more moot. Now the task of hp. it is often overlooked, but carriers can make effective link ships. Not the supercarriers, but normal ones. The ehp and resists can be made high, co processors are not a big deal. The only tough part is that they are not usable unless capfleets are deployed. But then risk it getting popped if supercaps on the field, but supercaps can link too, is a tough cycle. The only time it really becomes an issue is when the fleets exceed about 150 subcaps in a slugfest, then the commship is at risk. At that point, believe me, I am on my toes, I am always aligned with hostiles only showing and dilligently watching ranges. It they start closing in, I start bouncing, but that is the damnation, and the weakness of the vulture. Damnation can keep moving to avoid fight. If logi gets on a damnation, it isn't going down. The vulture suffers from sig and not having the same comparable ehp. To that effect, it is at a huge disadvantage. However, the microjump drives could change that. Allowing the vulture to jump around on grid and maintain a long sniper range. Still need our flagships though. 2 link T2 battleships please. I want my khanid abaddon. Especially if we are getting missiles soon :3
Carriers get alpha striked by subcaps in current battles.
I don't see a command ship fairing any better. Alpha will kill before reps can reach it.
Ongrid will simply create bigger blobs and favor bigger blobs. Who ever is on field has the advantage and whoever has teh most booster has the higher chance of winning. |
Soon Shin
Caucasian Culture Club Narwhals Ate My Duck
73
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 06:25:00 -
[63] - Quote
There is the Issue with Commandships being on field.
Other than being alpha striked, if your commandship is neuted it is effectively doing the same thing.
Once you neut out a commandship it can't turn on its links and therefore provide no bonus, so instead of wasting dps trying to kill it, you can just get everyone with a neut to drain it dry and rendering it into a useless brick. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
48
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 06:55:00 -
[64] - Quote
If all you do when in a covert is probe for link ships then you are beyond useless .. the combat prober's primary function is to find anything/everything and provide warp-ins.
Commandships and T3's have some of the biggest tanks in game, try fitting one without shoehorning on 5-6 links and be amazed! That said, all the CC's (except possibly the Damnation) should get a make-over if OnGrid is implemented, worst offender tank wise is the Eos .. Vulture/Claymore can likely get away with a slight/cosmetic change. If you don't believe me, then find a roaming gang using a tanked link ship with logistics support and call it primary right off the bat .. have fun dying in a fire
Rorqual gets 5%/lvl when deployed while an Orca get 3%/lvl at all times. If you have scouts out, protection in place and otherwise feeling good about yourself deploy the big boy .. otherwise use the Orca. Where does it say that getting maximum bonuses at all times is a right? Hell, if things are hot'ish you can slap the mining links onto a bricked Damnation and lose <10% bonus .. end of the world it is not.
As for forcing a type of play; To be competitive in PvP today one is forced to have links available .. making them ongrid doesn't even register on the "being forced" scale, it is more comparable to the Falcon range nerf than anything else.
With immense power there should be equal vulnerability .. and being able to effectively double the power of an entire fleet is rather immense. |
Soon Shin
Caucasian Culture Club Narwhals Ate My Duck
73
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 07:09:00 -
[65] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:If all you do when in a covert is probe for link ships then you are beyond useless .. the combat prober's primary function is to find anything/everything and provide warp-ins. Commandships and T3's have some of the biggest tanks in game, try fitting one without shoehorning on 5-6 links and be amazed! That said, all the CC's (except possibly the Damnation) should get a make-over if OnGrid is implemented, worst offender tank wise is the Eos .. Vulture/Claymore can likely get away with a slight/cosmetic change. If you don't believe me, then find a roaming gang using a tanked link ship with logistics support and call it primary right off the bat .. have fun dying in a fire Rorqual gets 5%/lvl when deployed while an Orca get 3%/lvl at all times. If you have scouts out, protection in place and otherwise feeling good about yourself deploy the big boy .. otherwise use the Orca. Where does it say that getting maximum bonuses at all times is a right? Hell, if things are hot'ish you can slap the mining links onto a bricked Damnation and lose <10% bonus .. end of the world it is not. As for forcing a type of play; To be competitive in PvP today one is forced to have links available .. making them ongrid doesn't even register on the "being forced" scale, it is more comparable to the Falcon range nerf than anything else. With immense power there should be equal vulnerability .. and being able to effectively double the power of an entire fleet is rather immense.
Well No one will use the Rorqual for a minor 11% boost over the Orca with the bigger expense and being stuck in industrial mode.
OnGrid games will just simply make it so that the fleet with the most boosters or Bigger blob wins.
Blobs will just get bigger. And nothing will have truly changed in the end. |
Smoke Adian
12
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 07:10:00 -
[66] - Quote
No risk and 25% more shields for a whole fleet is silly. |
Rico Minali
Sons Of 0din Fatal Ascension
436
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 07:17:00 -
[67] - Quote
Soon Shin wrote:There is the Issue with Commandships being on field.
Other than being alpha striked, if your commandship is neuted it is effectively doing the same thing.
Once you neut out a commandship it can't turn on its links and therefore provide no bonus, so instead of wasting dps trying to kill it, you can just get everyone with a neut to drain it dry and rendering it into a useless brick.
And thats why they SHOULD be on field, so that they can be neutralised tactically during the battle, IF you have the presence of mind and a well equipped fleet. Trust me, I almost know what I'm doing. |
Soon Shin
Caucasian Culture Club Narwhals Ate My Duck
73
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 07:20:00 -
[68] - Quote
Well looks like the solution will now be to bring bigger blobs and more boosters.
|
Daedalus II
Helios Research Combat Mining and Logistics
106
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 08:08:00 -
[69] - Quote
If instant alpha of command ships on grid is a problem, why not just "hide" them. The T3 ships are perfectly good boosters, so set one up as booster (not a full rack) and put some other weaponry on it so it appears to be a pvp fitted T3. If the enemy doesn't know it's a booster they have no reason to alpha it. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
563
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 08:13:00 -
[70] - Quote
'i can't bring my booster ship on grid, it might get shot at! Then I wouldnt be able to bring out only the most blinged out t3 fleet boosters with impunity!'
lol jesus
|
|
Ivana Twinkle
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
186
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 08:49:00 -
[71] - Quote
Who cares, It's not game breaking and it'll impact both sides equally. It may even be preferable to have a unused ship sitting in system. |
Neddy Fox
FireStar Inc Curatores Veritatis Alliance
6
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 09:20:00 -
[72] - Quote
Quote: The one part I am not sure I follow is the #boosts/bonuses. Does that mean command ships would only fit two links or does it mean they get two different racial boosts able to be applied?
AFAIK , the dev mentioned having CS's to get 2 racial bonusses, so (FOR EXAMPLE) the EOS would get a 5% bonus per level for Information warfare and Skirmish.
This is what I understood from him. How many links you actually fit is up to the pilot. I myself fly a lot in a Damnation with only 2 links, 1 passive EHP and a skirmish (yes really) for lower sigradius. Both heavily tank your fleet members more.
On the ongrid / offgrid bonusses : Again, the dev said it would be LESS, not gone, when the booster is not on grid. If you like to ***** away in a pos while your fleetmembers are dying/fighting , a lesser bonus makes sense.
A fleet command ship belongs in the frontline.
Only downside I see is by how I and my fellow FC's fly gangs : split in 2-3 squads, with indivudual Squad "FC's" to surround reds , be in adjecent systems on the gate to catch people that want to get out etc.. This requires a booster per Squad. But if we do shield gangs, a drake with a siege link in will do, with a wing commander vulture, so when we fight together we have max boosts, and when divided we have some smaller bonus per squad.
The unprobable loki's need to go too. It just doesn't make sense that a mindlinked t2 warfare linked loki still cannot be probed, when fitted properly.
|
Gevlin
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
121
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 09:45:00 -
[73] - Quote
A Silly Idea .... to help destroy Rorquals
Turn it into the new Capital Command ship. Allow it to have its amazing bonus +50% while in industrial mode (Rorquals Siege Mode) for any Command link Will only work on grid and out outside a POS.
Though It is a ships that can be remote repaired and Jammed while in industrial mode.
Due to its having the weakest tank when looking at Capitals than can use modules it would be the first ship to go down each battle, especially it is only s shield tank ship.
I agree with several people: CCP needs to focus most of eve's recources on FIS, but the development of WIS still needs to continue, just as a slower and more efficient pace. In eve I wish to be more than just a machine. |
Zverofaust
Ascetic Virtues
31
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 10:08:00 -
[74] - Quote
To give my 2 cents as someone who uses offgrid boosting and fights against those who do erry day, I love the idea of making it on-grid specific. Having an unprobable loki booster alt hidden in a deep safe adds absolutely nothing to tactical or strategic side of battle. Its only counter is to have one of your own. This is both dumb for gameplay's sake, and makes no sense from logical standpoint, that some dude millions of km away is somehow supercharging your ****.
I also think something needs to be done RE aggression. It doesn't make sense that a neutral RR will be flagged as enemy when he reps your enemy but a neutral booster won't. He is arguably giving as much of a benefit to your enemies as the RR but you can't do ****. It's become so that many corps and even individuals (like myself) will keep a neutral Loki alt in a deep safe in system just throwing out boosts completely scott-free from harm or retribution.
Make them only work on grid or at the very least be 50% as good if off-grid. |
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
769
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 10:09:00 -
[75] - Quote
Parsee789 wrote:How will you make this work?
Imagine you're in a system where you have different parts of the fleet in different areas of the system.
With the requirement of On-Grid boosting the fleet commander will have be on-grid with one group while the rest receive no bonuses.
In order for boosts to be given to everywhere you will now need several times more leadership players to give everyone boosts.
This requirement for On-grid boosting will simply hurt more than it helps.
This will make the application of Boosts more complex and Cluttered.
This will simply make applying boosts a real big hassle when you're dealing with fleets that are scattered around the system, all doing different things.
How are you gonna fix this without requiring more leadership characters and bigger blobs.
People all have been proposing nerfing boosts to grid without providing a way to properly balancing the nerf.
You propose things that are convenient to you, you don't think ahead of the consequences that it will make.
It's almost as though people would have to think about where the bonuses are needed the most and plan accordingly.
In other words, reducing or eliminating off-grid bonuses would be a good thing.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Resurrected Darkness
76
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 10:14:00 -
[76] - Quote
Parsee789 wrote:The problem you suggest is no longer about having a booster, but now instead how many boosters you have. For each squadron you will need a ganglink ship and boosting character. This will make providing boosts more cluttered and annoying.
The battle will become all about who has the most boosters.
Is that what you really want? What I want is for you to either HTFU or GTFO. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |
baltec1
908
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 10:16:00 -
[77] - Quote
Soon Shin wrote:There is the Issue with Commandships being on field.
Other than being alpha striked, if your commandship is neuted it is effectively doing the same thing.
Once you neut out a commandship it can't turn on its links and therefore provide no bonus, so instead of wasting dps trying to kill it, you can just get everyone with a neut to drain it dry and rendering it into a useless brick.
The other sides commnad ships will be in exactly the same danger. Whats your point? |
Ajita al Tchar
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
171
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 11:19:00 -
[78] - Quote
Off grid boosting = mini-siege mode Let's say because you need moar powah to give the bonuses to a fleet somewhere not nearby, and to get that powah you must go into siege mode. Mini because keeping it under 5 minutes is probably good--enough time to be found by someone who knows what they are doing, even if nigh unprobable.
lolololol |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong White-Lotus
497
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 12:11:00 -
[79] - Quote
Parsee789 wrote:MotherMoon wrote: Actually I'm all for making it so if you're more than 150km away you don't even get bonuses. You did not answer my question. What If I had a fleet who were spread through different Areas of the entire system. Areas that are separated in terms of AU rather than km. What if my fleet was defending multiple poses? 150km is certainly not enough to cover that distance. How are you going to handle that?
get more command ship pilots.
but I understand what you're trying to say, so how about a compromise? Command ships can keep giving off grid bonuses... but I get to use my logistic ships shield transfers anywhere in the system. Even if I'm 10 AU away. Ok, does that sound fair?
Because lets face it, if i couldn't heal other ships while I'm off grid, how would we ever be able to heal ships in other fleets if we spread out?
They just need to make it so command ships give bonuses based on range, no matter who the fleet booster is.
Quote:Off grid boosting = mini-siege mode Again I'm so for this idea, as long as they can't move, and be hunted down. whether it be the ship itself or if command ships start dropping deployable that give the bonuses instead of the command ship it'self. I'm ok with it. |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong White-Lotus
497
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 12:16:00 -
[80] - Quote
Parsee789 wrote:Markus Reese wrote:MotherMoon wrote:Actually I'm all for making it so if you're more than 150km away you don't even get bonuses. This idea not in favor of, having a specific range. I have been in larger combats where the fleets spread out a fair bit but still on grid. Start doing bounces around bubbles and poses, ranges can easily exceed that. For Parsee about the spread fleet, in that case, that would be a risk for splitting the fleet up, or you set up more planning in the wings. No bonus or partial bonus, I just want an advantage for putting commship onto the field. With current 0.0 fleet doctrines, your commandship will die within a blink of an eye. Even Carriers get alpha striked by a fleet these days, hence one of the very reasons why supercarriers are used as logistics rather than normal carriers. How can you make it so without giving the Commandship have an ehp bigger than capitals?
easy fix the whole, 1000 ships can target you all at once without some sort of draw back.
I've been here for 7 years. And one day they will choose one of the many many fixes for this.
I like the one where as long as multiple people are in the process of targeting, targeting slows down for each next person in the stack, until the person below them is done targeting. Basically you lower the sig radius of command ships. This combined with the new target breaker module, should keep you alive in a well organized fight.
fit yourself with a buffer tank and have back up to heal you. |
|
Zagdul
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
478
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 12:20:00 -
[81] - Quote
AraniFyr wrote:It should be on grid...too big of an advantage for such low risk
Disagree.
titans for example. They're about to be nerfed to an extent where they are going to be given a different role. For how much they cost, It's not something you warp around with your home defense fleet.
A lot about command ships need to be fixed before they start making bonuses on-grid. Not to mention fleet bonuses break after you do a session change, I don't see this particular part of the game being touched for a while.
It's not Rocket Surgery |
Neddy Fox
FireStar Inc Curatores Veritatis Alliance
6
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 12:37:00 -
[82] - Quote
Would be nice if CCP Ytterbium would post some comments here (IIRC that was de DEV doing the round tables)..
|
Proteus Maximus
New Eden Outcasts Malicious Intent Gentleman's Club
63
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 12:51:00 -
[83] - Quote
Definitely require a fleet booster be on grid. In regard to defense why not modification to fit a purely defensive siege module? Discuss Eve... Burn it....Burn it All |
Rhinanna
CyberShield Inc ROMANIAN-LEGION
119
|
Posted - 2012.03.28 13:01:00 -
[84] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:On-grid is fine but fitting requirements for links on T3s would need to be dropped so that the booster doesn't die to two 1400mm volleys with a remotely efficient link setup. Otherwise people would use command ships again to be able to use full racks of links while still having hundreds of thousands of EHP. Just because you're balancing something doesn't mean you have to make it practically useless.
Only if they also reduce the Tech 3 bonuses to lower than that of command ships.
At the moment a Tech 3 command can bring bigger bonuses to a gang than a dedicated command ship which is silly. The command's ships advantage is that it can bring 3 links instead of 1, but as you don't need tank at the moment, the Tech 3s can bring 3 links with bigger bonuses. This helps balance that.
Its a trade-off, choose which you want on your Tier 3, massive tank or all 3 links, its up to you, stop demanding your tech 3 does everything best.
-The sword is only as sharp as the one who wields it! Other names: Drenzul (WoT, WoW, Lineage 2, WarH, BloodBowl, BSG, SC2 and lots more)-á |
Andre Jean Sarpantis
University of Caille Gallente Federation
20
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 11:06:00 -
[85] - Quote
Allrigth, throwing in my two cents on this matter, after reading most but not all of the posts to thei thread are about Combat activities, but to be honest, not all aspects in Eve are just combat focused, please remember about the industrials / miners which enjoy the bonus given from a Off grid Rorqual or Ecellent skilled Orca pilot beeing on Safe spot or under POS FF, Remove the complete Off grid Boost will hurt them such massively Miners will get another knife in their back brougth to them by CCP and favorited by the whiney PvPlers not beeing able to find a solution for enemy boosters.
Most of you PvPlers brougth very valid points but selfish and egoistic like most of yours are forget there are other aspects jobs wihtin Eve also profiting from this Off grid bonus......So please....Stop whinning find another solution then removing Off grid Boosts PERIOD.
|
Misunderstood Genius
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
33
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 11:22:00 -
[86] - Quote
Noone mentioned ECM so far. Who cares about booster? Strange... |
Misunderstood Genius
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
33
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 11:28:00 -
[87] - Quote
Anyway: a booster should be on grid. You want to fight with bonuses? Be on grid visually. But what about fleet bonuses? If boosters have to be on grid the fleet booster should be logically on grid, too. Otherwise: no bonuses. |
Klown Walk
Black Rebel Rifter Club
78
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 11:41:00 -
[88] - Quote
Rhinanna wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote:On-grid is fine but fitting requirements for links on T3s would need to be dropped so that the booster doesn't die to two 1400mm volleys with a remotely efficient link setup. Otherwise people would use command ships again to be able to use full racks of links while still having hundreds of thousands of EHP. Just because you're balancing something doesn't mean you have to make it practically useless. Only if they also reduce the Tech 3 bonuses to lower than that of command ships. At the moment a Tech 3 command can bring bigger bonuses to a gang than a dedicated command ship which is silly. The command's ships advantage is that it can bring 3 links instead of 1, but as you don't need tank at the moment, the Tech 3s can bring 3 links with bigger bonuses. This helps balance that. Its a trade-off, choose which you want on your Tier 3, massive tank or all 3 links, its up to you, stop demanding your tech 3 does everything best.
Command ships can be used for anti tackle in a fight and has a massive tank, t3 will die so fast that they will be useless on grid. Making them on grid will only help camps/blobs. |
Beat General
Sons of Retribution Malice Alliance
30
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 11:53:00 -
[89] - Quote
I'm glad none of you work at CCP, because all these ideas are terrible.
also: Nerfing off-grid boosting will only buff blobs.
T3s aren't "OP". A T3 can fit only 1 link right out the box with a stronger bonus. A fleet command ship can fit 3, as well as a beastly tank.
If you want to make the T3 fit three links then you gimp the fit so much it gets 2 shotted by anything, does no dps, does nothing. |
Katarina Reid
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
167
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 12:31:00 -
[90] - Quote
Andre Jean Sarpantis wrote:Allrigth, throwing in my two cents on this matter, after reading most but not all of the posts to thei thread are about Combat activities, but to be honest, not all aspects in Eve are just combat focused, please remember about the industrials / miners which enjoy the bonus given from a Off grid Rorqual or Ecellent skilled Orca pilot beeing on Safe spot or under POS FF, Remove the complete Off grid Boost will hurt them such massively Miners will get another knife in their back brougth to them by CCP and favorited by the whiney PvPlers not beeing able to find a solution for enemy boosters.
Most of you PvPlers brougth very valid points but selfish and egoistic like most of yours are forget there are other aspects jobs wihtin Eve also profiting from this Off grid bonus......So please....Stop whinning find another solution then removing Off grid Boosts PERIOD.
You want to benfit from a Rorqual then u have to risk it. I cant wait to kill Rorqual's that can no longer hide in the pos. |
|
Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries Alliance not Found
32
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 12:34:00 -
[91] - Quote
The biggest reason not to nerf off-grid boosting is that it becomes a disincentive to splitting your fleet into smaller groups. A fleet of 250 will have to stay mobbed up around their booster or lose all of their bonuses.
Off-grid boosters allow the same fleet to split up to perform different missions within the same system and although there is not yet a true incentive to do that it has been said many times that that is what CCP want to achieve. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
270
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 12:35:00 -
[92] - Quote
If your Fleet CS are being volleyed, then using something with more EHP would be sensible. Should carriers and Titans get Fleet CS-like bonuses to warfare links? Moving TItans away from a direct combat role might be sensible, but they already give gang bonuses and I'm not sure about the balance implications for carriers. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
68
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 15:36:00 -
[93] - Quote
Andre Jean Sarpantis wrote:mining concerns If you are in a 'safe' area then bring the fat-boy in with you .. saves a ton of logistics as you can compress on site. If you have roamers playing tag with the always inept patrol fleets (speaking as an old miner, damn pew'ers were always late ) then you bring a CS .. costs you 10-15% bonus at most and he can double as rat controller freeing up whomever was/is doing that.
Jacob Holland wrote:The biggest reason not to nerf off-grid boosting is that it becomes a disincentive to splitting your fleet into smaller groups. A fleet of 250 will have to stay mobbed up around their booster or lose all of their bonuses.... Sure, if you absolutely want to put all your eggs in that one basket. Imagine if you brought more than one booster though, one per wing .. one per squad .. with the fleet booster tagging along to be present when the **** hits the ventilation. The reason for fleets only having the one booster is squarely on the fact that we can currently get away with having the one 5-6 link hull sitting somewhere safe, whereas we have all gotten accustomed to redundancy in all other -secondary- hull types with fleets being padded with DPS after tackle/ewar/logis is in place .. about time links were treated in a similar fashion.
Gypsio III wrote:... Should carriers and Titans get Fleet CS-like bonuses to warfare links? ... No need, it falls under "using the right tool for the job". Same as for wanting eWar (non-ECM variety) deployed in blob fights, the ships with bonuses wont survive so one sacrifices efficiency for survivability by fitting the modules to BCs/BS'/Capitals.
If the CS gets volleyed repeatedly stripping you of all bonuses, then accepting the ~15% lower bonus from a carrier/SC would be infinitely better as you actually get to enjoy the bonuses, albeit lower, for the duration of the fight .. or at least longer than a flock of Sebo'd tier3 BC takes to lock.
It is all about choice and consequence.
|
Lord Dravius
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
18
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 16:24:00 -
[94] - Quote
Vertisce Soritenshi wrote:Fleet boosters belong on grid. Do whatever you have to do to balance them properly but they belong on grid.
No support for the OP here. Agreed. |
Din Tempre
Raven's Flight Vanguard.
6
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 17:16:00 -
[95] - Quote
Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:I just remembered one of the new modules for anti blobs. The new module was to shake off any lock on yourself, and the more locks on you the better chance at disrupting all locks. Added way to shave off dps in inferno and upped survival chance if for at-least a little while longer of such ships.
Won't this likely be a mid-slot? So shield command ships will have to sacrifice tank while armor will have to sacrifice nothing? |
Addrake
Origin. Black Legion.
24
|
Posted - 2012.04.23 20:42:00 -
[96] - Quote
Removing off grid boosters is a ******** idea and I'll explain why;
- You force another layer of complexity onto an already cumbersome system for fleet boosting.
- You concede yet another boost to defense in 0.0 warfare due to fighting on pos grids. (tcu's, tech moons, cyno jammers, etc)
- When you are a smaller force fighting 'the blob' there is a point when no tank whatsoever is going to save that command ship from being volleyed. So if you are, lets say a 40 man gang going up against 120 man maelstrom fleet, you might as well write off that command ship the moment you land on grid.
So lets look at why people are really pissed off about off grid links.
- People using offgrid boosters to enhance their 100mn tengu's are making people rage in lowsec.
- Small gangs using offgrid boosters to provide bonuses with what appears to be 0 risk.
The interesting thing here is you can counter offgrid links with probes. I've seen it done effectively. If it's too hard for everyone then sure ccp should look at adding an increase in sig when you have command processors fitted to your ship, which is the only decent idea I've read in this entire thread. But the problem with getting rid of them entirely is that it will become exceptionally difficult to take on massive gangs with a substantially smaller force, which is already difficult to do as is.
Oh and that anti-blob module that everyone is huff puffing about is a horrible idea. There already is a great counter to the blob, it's called stealth bombers, transversal, sig, spies calling out primaries, etc etc. But lets instead try to introduce a module that will make the game more one dimensional. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
69
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 04:21:00 -
[97] - Quote
Addrake wrote: You force another layer of complexity onto an already cumbersome system for fleet boosting. Clicking "assign as booster" is cumbersome? If that is your tolerance level then it is a wonder you are playing Eve to be honest - Imagine if an FC could not only assign a booster but have a boost-list to manipulate, so whenever one booster goes offline (dead, warps, etc.) the next one down is automatically applied ..
Addrake wrote: You concede yet another boost to defense in 0.0 warfare due to fighting on pos grids. (tcu's, tech moons, cyno jammers, etc) - POS/Sov is being revamped (again), Dust is looming near and Moons are likely to be hammered at some point. Imagine if something like a cyno-jammer was attached to a planetary orbital structure (think POCO) and vulnerable from both space and surface, no one is advocating a straight switch to on-grid as it would likely break more than is healthy. Or simpler still .. what if links were unable to activate while inside a forcefield?
Addrake wrote: When you are a smaller force fighting 'the blob' there is a point when no tank whatsoever is going to save that command ship from being volleyed. So if you are, lets say a 40 man gang going up against 120 man maelstrom fleet, you might as well write off that command ship the moment you land on grid.[/list] So in that super extreme scenario you believe the bonuses from said links would be able to save the day? And you do not see a problem with what is essentially an invulnerable ship projecting that kind of power? .. foot meet shotgun.
Addrake wrote:The interesting thing here is you can counter offgrid links with probes. I've seen it done effectively ... So being able to increase the power of up to 250 people by 50%+ from anywhere in a system is perfectly fine because a max skilled, implanted and faction fitted covert can catch them provided they are stationary and AFK/dual-boxed? Doesn't matter if you give them a sig size of a Titan, you are still left with a mechanic that provides almost unlimited benefit without being in direct danger.
PS: Boosted Tengu's are yesteryears news, now its boosted AF's .. just sayin'
|
Dbars Grinding
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
472
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 04:42:00 -
[98] - Quote
Sure if you buff command ships. I have more space likes than you.-á |
Tobiaz
Spacerats
321
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 07:21:00 -
[99] - Quote
I disagree 100% with 'don't nerf my booster-alt' OP
Off-grid booster-alts have become both mandatory and a choice with no consequence. The double whammy of fail. Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!-á Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors! |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong White-Lotus
568
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 09:33:00 -
[100] - Quote
nerf them HARD
and I have maxed leadership skills, With the new target breaker module these ships will have lasting power.
Bonuses should be based on range with the closer you are to the command ship the better the bonuses.
edit: they need to rewrite the system, no more fleet boosters. Just pure simple, if on grid or within 250km of command ship, give 10% bonus to shields. And if there is more than one command ship the one with better skills get his effect has final say.
I want to say something, I have 13,000 posts on these forums. 7 years as an eve online player, and I have have never seen a dumber statement in my time here on the forums.
Quote:also: Nerfing off-grid boosting will only buff blobs.
slow clap |
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
554
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 09:36:00 -
[101] - Quote
Andre Jean Sarpantis wrote:Allrigth, throwing in my two cents on this matter, after reading most but not all of the posts to thei thread are about Combat activities, but to be honest, not all aspects in Eve are just combat focused, please remember about the industrials / miners which enjoy the bonus given from a Off grid Rorqual or Ecellent skilled Orca pilot beeing on Safe spot or under POS FF, Remove the complete Off grid Boost will hurt them such massively Miners will get another knife in their back brougth to them by CCP and favorited by the whiney PvPlers not beeing able to find a solution for enemy boosters.
Most of you PvPlers brougth very valid points but selfish and egoistic like most of yours are forget there are other aspects jobs wihtin Eve also profiting from this Off grid bonus......So please....Stop whinning find another solution then removing Off grid Boosts PERIOD.
Sure was worth digging up a ~25day old post for this? shiptoastin' liek a baws |
Khumar Taarr-Sett
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 09:45:00 -
[102] - Quote
Just a couple of questions here.
Would having an on grid requirement increase the load on the server at all?
What would you guys think about a Counter Warfare link module? Could be system wide link dampening and/or revealing any active warfare (not foreman) linking ships as a warp to point for fleet members. Yeah it would be tricky to implement but could be fun. Maybe these modules could keep some CS's off grid while allowing a counter and perhaps it would lead to new tactics. |
Elisha Starkiller
Viziam Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 10:15:00 -
[103] - Quote
Death to no risk off grid boosters!!!!!
really they are spoiling small gang pvp, if you want the boost they should be on grid to take effect! make command ships worth it again!
me out! |
Aedron
Aedron Holding.
2
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 11:34:00 -
[104] - Quote
Rico Minali wrote:Command ships should give better bonuses than the do it all T3s anyway, and yes command linking ships should be on grid with their fleet.
This. I'd like to see the numbers for nerfing the boost-bonus in a T3. A command ship is built for that and has that purpose, thus should be giving the best boost possible in-game if fit right, and not the Tengu (taking the Shield example of tengu/35% vs. Vulture/31%).
I for one will be looking forward to the nerf. I'm not in favor of removing the OGB ability, but will take the T3 nerf. |
Jerick Ludhowe
Wraiths of Abaddon
61
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 11:49:00 -
[105] - Quote
Drew Solaert wrote:How is an a pro 1v1 pvper going to work if you can't have your off grid booster! Shock Horror!
Don't forget your covops alt to scout, and falcon alt in case your "solo" pvp starts to go all hairy like :P
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
562
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 11:58:00 -
[106] - Quote
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:Drew Solaert wrote:How is an a pro 1v1 pvper going to work if you can't have your off grid booster! Shock Horror! Don't forget your covops alt to scout, and falcon alt in case your "solo" pvp starts to go all hairy like :P
It's just the insurance vs the other '1' guy who has a cyno, titanbridge and hundreds-of-alliancemates online. shiptoastin' liek a baws |
VaMei
Meafi Corp
128
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 12:31:00 -
[107] - Quote
E man Industries wrote:AraniFyr wrote:It should be on grid...too big of an advantage for such low risk Agreed, how ever command ships are primary....they need mor eof a buffer when boosting to exist on grid.
What if Supers were given the bonus to gang links too?
Give Command ships the 5% bonus, so they have a purpose in small to medium fights. Give T3s the 3% bonus so they can support black-ops teams, and be the Swiss Army knife, with out rendering Command ships obsolete in conventional fights. Give the Supers a 3% bonus and 3 links so they can support fleets in major combat.
That would solve the buffer problem in fleet fights, give Supers a purpose again, make Command ships the best at their single purpose, and get the gang boosters on the battlefield without having them evaporate before they drop out of warp. |
Barakkus
1526
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 14:29:00 -
[108] - Quote
Make them be on grid, half the people I know won't pvp anymore without an OG booster, it's lame. http://youtu.be/yytbDZrw1jc |
Holy One
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
192
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 18:05:00 -
[109] - Quote
AraniFyr wrote:It should be on grid...too big of an advantage for such low risk
|
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
5
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 19:09:00 -
[110] - Quote
Neddy Fox wrote:A fleet command ship belongs in the frontline.
|
|
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
5
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 19:18:00 -
[111] - Quote
Andre Jean Sarpantis wrote:Allrigth, throwing in my two cents on this matter, after reading most but not all of the posts to thei thread are about Combat activities, but to be honest, not all aspects in Eve are just combat focused, please remember about the industrials / miners which enjoy the bonus given from a Off grid Rorqual or Ecellent skilled Orca pilot beeing on Safe spot or under POS FF, Remove the complete Off grid Boost will hurt them such massively Miners will get another knife in their back brougth to them by CCP and favorited by the whiney PvPlers not beeing able to find a solution for enemy boosters.
Most of you PvPlers brougth very valid points but selfish and egoistic like most of yours are forget there are other aspects jobs wihtin Eve also profiting from this Off grid bonus......So please....Stop whinning find another solution then removing Off grid Boosts PERIOD.
If you're not willing to risk or protect your boosting orca in your belt, you should't be in that belt in the first place.
No support for offgrid boosting. |
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
593
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 19:30:00 -
[112] - Quote
Pro-tip: You have access to offgrid boosting as well.
Opps...sorry for pointing that out. If you don't want to be a booster or don't want to put it off grid since you want to be in the action....why is that a problem? Remember, you can do this too and I don't see a problem if you pull the same **** as the other guy...except its when the other guy pulls this **** because he can "meta-game" better then you by putting his booster off grid (remember, you too can catch the booster before it flies off grid...if you can't then you deserve to lose BUT you have the option to bring your own booster). Its not risk, its adapting how to win while reducing risk and EVE being EVE....nothing is fair or riskless unless its actually exploiting the game like Monkeysphere going invisiable to local |
Vertisce Soritenshi
Varion Galactic Tragedy.
1552
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 19:38:00 -
[113] - Quote
Can't wait for offgrid boosting to be nerfed to oblivion. There will be an ocean of tears that day! EvE is not about PvP.-á EvE is about the SANDBOX! - CCP!-á Open the door!!! |
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
1289
|
Posted - 2012.04.24 20:05:00 -
[114] - Quote
I'm inclined to keep off grid as is.
What I would recommend, though, is that if inside a POS shield , the modules don't work.
This keeps a balance between aggressor and defender in that both can scan and destroy the others booster ships. This goes for Rorqs as well. I see no reason to have to take out a POS just to kill a booster. Way to unbalanced.
Mr Epeen Me too!-á I ate one sour, too! |
Crazyy Ivann
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.05.01 11:33:00 -
[115] - Quote
So the people who currently utilize the tactic with offgrid booster cries because a lot of their advantage will go down the drain when you suddenly will have to drastically change your semi-afk tengu alt tactic, to a very much active role on the battlefield for effective bonuses.
In theory this is not a bad thing, we will probably see tengu pilots being sold on the char bazaar for half of current prices.
But also the command-ship pilots that usually are on grid wants more because they think they have too little EHP on their ships afraid of alpha and want MORE ehp, which will be just as bad, since a ship with stupid high EHP will never be primaried (until the fight is won by other means) so command-ships will just be a necessary evil in all fleets, never killing stuff, never getting killed.
It's all just a game of who gets the most advantage at any given point, it's hard to tell what is right and what is wrong.
But i do agree something should be done, but i don't think the solution is as easy as some people seem to think. |
Ziranda Hakuli
Relativity Holding Corp Relativity Alliance
127
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 05:37:00 -
[116] - Quote
Vertisce Soritenshi wrote:Fleet boosters belong on grid. Do whatever you have to do to balance them properly but they belong on grid.
No support for the OP here.
you sound as butt hurt as everyone else wanting them nerfed when you invade a system and they got someone boosting their fleet. you know what this is called right? Home ground advantage. yeah you too can bring one in and hide in system somewhere.
You do realize that this will affect not just command ship pilots but also orca/Rorq pilots.
This is just a stupid idea to force booster pilots on grid. not my fault if you do not have a booster pilot in your fleet helping.
I do agree on one thing. the T3 Strat Cruisers, yes their boosting power needs to be nerfed. It shouldnever have exceeded the command ship bonuses as this is a very specialized path of training.
If CCP does nerf the command ships to where they need to be on grid i will not bother re upping that accounts subscription |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1464
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 05:46:00 -
[117] - Quote
Ziranda Hakuli wrote:Vertisce Soritenshi wrote:Fleet boosters belong on grid. Do whatever you have to do to balance them properly but they belong on grid.
No support for the OP here. you sound as butt hurt as everyone else wanting them nerfed when you invade a system and they got someone boosting their fleet. you know what this is called right? Home ground advantage. yeah you too can bring one in and hide in system somewhere. You do realize that this will affect not just command ship pilots but also orca/Rorq pilots. This is just a stupid idea to force booster pilots on grid. not my fault if you do not have a booster pilot in your fleet helping. I do agree on one thing. the T3 Strat Cruisers, yes their boosting power needs to be nerfed. It shouldnever have exceeded the command ship bonuses as this is a very specialized path of training. If CCP does nerf the command ships to where they need to be on grid i will not bother re upping that accounts subscription
wow i actually agree with you a rogue goon |
MotherMoon
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
1043
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 07:24:00 -
[118] - Quote
NERF THEM
everyone has maxxed out boster skills by now anyways. so both sides have all boosters running at full in every fright off grid.
This makes combat slate and boring. If everyone gets 10% more shields and 10% more armor, does either side really have an advantage? I mean whats the point if both sides get an unkillable boost from off grid? might as well not even have them in the game if that's the case.
Bring them into combat zone gives them risk vs reward. meaning the side that's willing to risk more wins.
the people that don't want them nerfed are the whiners, they don't want to have to bring command ships, they don't want to have to risk anything.
oh and if the goal of the whiners in here is you want a home field advantage then they can introduce system wide command modules for POS. maybe weaker than normal command ships, but just as safe as off grid boosting. But killable. http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg |
MotherMoon
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
1043
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 07:31:00 -
[119] - Quote
Andre Jean Sarpantis wrote:Allrigth, throwing in my two cents on this matter, after reading most but not all of the posts to thei thread are about Combat activities, but to be honest, not all aspects in Eve are just combat focused, please remember about the industrials / miners which enjoy the bonus given from a Off grid Rorqual or Ecellent skilled Orca pilot beeing on Safe spot or under POS FF, Remove the complete Off grid Boost will hurt them such massively Miners will get another knife in their back brougth to them by CCP and favorited by the whiney PvPlers not beeing able to find a solution for enemy boosters.
Most of you PvPlers brougth very valid points but selfish and egoistic like most of yours are forget there are other aspects jobs wihtin Eve also profiting from this Off grid bonus......So please....Stop whinning find another solution then removing Off grid Boosts PERIOD.
They could just make those non pvp ships ignore the on grid rule, come on, think outside the box http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg |
Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
63
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 07:47:00 -
[120] - Quote
Having boosters not being on grid is akin to cheating. The command ships have a decent enough tank to withstand some punishment, and T3 boosters with 5 links should die fast and in a fire.
I vote for on grid or no boost. |
|
Schalac
Apocalypse Reign
63
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 07:53:00 -
[121] - Quote
VaMei wrote: Give the Supers a 3% bonus and 3 links so they can support fleets in major combat.
That would solve the buffer problem in fleet fights, give Supers a purpose again, make Command ships the best at their single purpose, and get the gang boosters on the battlefield without having them evaporate before they drop out of warp.
Wasn't there a ship for that? Oh yeah, it was called the Titan....
|
Durzel
The Xenodus Initiative.
23
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 08:43:00 -
[122] - Quote
- Rebalance the existing fleet command ships so they have +10% shield or armour HP depending on hull, to match the Damnation - Give the T3 command subsystem a HP bonus that's not quite as good (to reflect the command bonus being higher) but enough to give them more survivability on grid |
Durzel
The Xenodus Initiative.
23
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 08:45:00 -
[123] - Quote
Aqriue wrote:Pro-tip: You have access to offgrid boosting as well. Opps...sorry for pointing that out. If you don't want to be a booster or don't want to put it off grid since you want to be in the action....why is that a problem? Remember, you can do this too and I don't see a problem if you pull the same **** as the other guy...except its when the other guy pulls this **** because he can "meta-game" better then you by putting his booster off grid (remember, you too can catch the booster before it flies off grid...if you can't then you deserve to lose BUT you have the option to bring your own booster). Its not risk, its adapting how to win while reducing risk and EVE being EVE....nothing is fair or riskless unless its actually exploiting the game like Monkeysphere going invisiable to local This is the same argument used for pre-nerf Falcons by the way.
"You can do it too" is the worst kind of balance argument just FYI. |
Jake Warbird
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1637
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 09:47:00 -
[124] - Quote
boost kin |
Hicksimus
Slaxtopia Reverberation Project
122
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 10:16:00 -
[125] - Quote
This sounds like one of the final game changes that can be made to make EvE PvP more favourable for blobbing. Want to not have large fleets using it? Make the bonus decrease as size of fleet increases. But don't force the command ship on field and ruin it for the few people who have the balls/isk to try to PvP without outnumbering an enemy.
If you guys want the command ship on grid then I'm sure you will be just fine with: A charging time for jump drives No range bonus to logi ECM optimal and falloff reduced to 1/5 of current values
Things I have realized from the EvE forums: Many people beleive cost means money and only money If you use it then it needs a buff. -áIf you don't use it then it needs to be nerfed. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1468
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 10:21:00 -
[126] - Quote
Schalac wrote:Wasn't there a ship for that? Oh yeah, it was called the Titan....
titans do not and have never had an effectiveness bonus to ganglinks EVE Online: Trammel (or NGE) |
Kyoso Oni
Sigma-Six Symptom Inc.
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 11:40:00 -
[127] - Quote
Industrial bonuses should remain as is (no penalty). Rest off-grid boosting should be -50% offgrid, 100% in grid.
Another option would be to restrict the number of bonuses that can be off-grid (for example 1-2).
T3 should never surpass a CS booster effect, and CSs should be remodeled to tank better, as the Damnation.
Posts regarding "don't change my playstyle" and "just because the other fleet is not as smart to have an off-grid", well, get over it. If changes come (they will, they just don't have to be the ones I mentioned) they will apply to everyone and that will be your new playstyle.
IMO it's a ship game, it has fleet battles, it's epic! If CCP can make it so it's fun and good to have a CS in the front line, I have to agree it's for the better. |
Y'nit Gidrine
Gold Horizons Industrial
12
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 11:44:00 -
[128] - Quote
A lesser tank is not an issue if you have competent logi pilots.
Remember to give your logi pilots lots of love to help them grow big and strong! |
Tamiya Sarossa
Hedion University Amarr Empire
176
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 12:05:00 -
[129] - Quote
As someone who uses them frequently in small gang combat, please nerf off-grid boosters. They discourage, quick fluid PvP because you have to get your boosters set up in system (off-grid) knowing the opponent will also have them, to the point where they're practically mandatory for any engagement.
I would like to engage without them, but since we're often outnumbered links are needed to just maintain parity. Also, on-grid only would be a boost to BC's as command ships (which I've always liked) because you can slot in a couple command BC's in a normal BC fleet and have them blend in. |
Muad 'dib
The Imperial Fedaykin
351
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 12:30:00 -
[130] - Quote
i hope ccp do introduce on grid boosting, because i will save a plex every month on my booster alt since i wont have to use boost links to be able to fight everyone also with boost links :D
Now would ccp want less plex sales, hmmmmmmmmmmm http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4375/mynewsig2.jpg |
|
Riknarr
Midhalla
19
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 11:08:00 -
[131] - Quote
I can think of a couple more possible options:
Introduce a formula for bonused ships off grid from the command ship so that the bonus reduces to 50% e.g. 0.5+(1/(2n)) This would mean that if the command ship was off grid then boosts would be poor on the gang as it increases in size. Everything on the same grid as the command ship gets 100% bonus. (options to have different boost values and stacking penalties of course)
Other option is to create a new fleet role of command bridge ship. A special class of ship could be assigned to bridge the bonuses onto its grid at 100%, drawback being that it is identified in overview with a special icon.
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
675
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 11:18:00 -
[132] - Quote
Aiwha wrote:E man Industries wrote:AraniFyr wrote:It should be on grid...too big of an advantage for such low risk Agreed, how ever command ships are primary....they need mor eof a buffer when boosting to exist on grid. The Damnation is a prime example of how a CS should be build, like a motherfucking tank. Give the other CS's bonuses to their tanking as well, AND nerf off grid bonuses.
Yes, and no.
The Damnation is great for slow big fat ass blobs. It's horrible for skirmish combat. There's actually people out there playing this game who want to play without potentially crashing the server while trying to jump. You know, where individual player skill matters, where you are mobile and can roam multiple regions on a daily basis, etc.
That being said: * The offgrid boosters needs a fix because a) they make command ships useless, and b) they are making small scale gangs using them too powerful. * The simple fix would be to make sure CS gets the full effect, and if they are on-grid, and make the non-Damnations in line with it to suit blob warfare. * Meanwhile, the t3 boosters would be the option for the smaller mobile gangs, so let them keep their boost offgrid, but at a partial effect.. and they need a slight nerf to how many links they can fit as well.
This game need to cater for everyone, from the blobs to the mid-size, as well as soloers. Ultimately balance should not be based on blobs alone. shiptoastin' liek a baws |
Spurty
D00M. Northern Coalition.
378
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 11:44:00 -
[133] - Quote
Battlecruisers have this as their role bonus:
99% reduction in the CPU need of Warfare Link modules.
When was the last time you fit a Warfare link module to your drake exactly?
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |
Sarmea Moon
Universal Freelance CONSORTIUM UNIVERSALIS
19
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 13:09:00 -
[134] - Quote
Don't want offgrid boosting? Fine. Command ships and fleet skills were a nerf to leadership in the first place.
Now you want to nerf the nerf even harder. How about we go back to the way it was- No fleet setup, everyone in gang receives the highest bonus in the gang, no max number in gang.
Gangs now have to be smaller, gangs now have to be setup with a heirarchy, gangs only get a few boosts. Joy.
Links were added. Then T3. If you want to nerf offgrid boosting, make it so only carriers and command ships can fit them.
Of course, no one in this thread apparently has even been in a proper large mining op. It's not just the rorq that would be nerfed (and you say it could be left out). But think about all the other things that would be nerfed as well- no gang bonuses unless in a single belt- can't go out cherrypicking all the belts at the same time, so they can move to another system quickly. |
Zeomebuch Nova
Metalworks
18
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 13:16:00 -
[135] - Quote
Talkietoaster wrote:I could imagine something like this
- on grid: no nerf - on safe spot: little nerf - near own POS: medium nerf - near Station / Gate: considerable nerf
IMO something like this:
- on grid: 100% - safe spot close to the fight: 50% - off grid within force field or docking range: 0%-10% |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
556
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 13:17:00 -
[136] - Quote
AraniFyr wrote:It should be on grid...too big of an advantage for such low risk
All the advantages for almost 0 risk because a well fitted one will require you have a well skilled toon/T2 ship/mods/rigs and virtue set If they keep them out of gridd they should at least give to boosting links sign radius drawback enough so you can easily scan them and pop them.
I'm for the only reasonable option that is to forcing those to be on grid. brb |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1232
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 13:27:00 -
[137] - Quote
Y'nit Gidrine wrote:A lesser tank is not an issue if you have competent logi pilots.
Remember to give your logi pilots lots of love to help them grow big and strong! It does depend on the size of the blob.
The coordinated F1-ing of 1400mm artillery can be very pronounced in their effects on a ship's structural integrity. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
Buhhdust Princess
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
80
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 14:15:00 -
[138] - Quote
DO NOT REMOVE OFF-GRID BONUSES. Yes, there is LITTLE risk involved.
Solution: Make Command Proccessors increase signature radius. That way if they fit 1 link they are nerfing themselves and can be unprobable. BUT if they fit 2 or 3 for 3 or 4 link T3's, then they are probable, and therefore adds element of risk.
End of story. -Buhhd |
REDNECKMINING
Nyan Cat Logistics PNG Associates
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 14:25:00 -
[139] - Quote
If the OG bonuses are removed, the requirement for the Rorqual to be sieged in order to give out bonuses needs to be removed as well. |
Mallak Azaria
416
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 14:30:00 -
[140] - Quote
REDNECKMINING wrote:If the OG bonuses are removed, the requirement for the Rorqual to be sieged in order to give out bonuses needs to be removed as well.
I think the Rorq being able to siege inside POS shields is a bit of a joke to be honest. Mining Barge buff: CCP-áhas acknowledged that miners in general-áare too stupid to make the correct fitting choices to make ganking them unprofitable. |
|
Gevlin
SMANews.net SpaceMonkey's Alliance
179
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 15:17:00 -
[141] - Quote
Listening to the alliance tournament pre-shows the new POS's will be dock able and not a bubble you sit in. So boosting from the safety of a POS will soon come to an end. But the POS will be able to be scalable so with the ability to include plenty of guns
So next year I can see a Titan jumping in killing the Rorqual and then warping off and cloaking
then some Titan Pilot using the next store buying little Crossed off Rorquals on his ship.
Some day I will have the internet and be able to play again. |
Whar Target
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 16:04:00 -
[142] - Quote
I can't imagine the number of lost subscriptions any on-grid booster nerf would result in.
Go ahead, whine and troll me for saying it, but it's the truth and CCP knows it.
It would also be another buff to blob warfare and a nerf to solo pvp. |
MadMuppet
Universal Freelance CONSORTIUM UNIVERSALIS
515
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 16:12:00 -
[143] - Quote
AWACS don't fly in to dogfights, the enemy has to go to them, yet they have the ability to provide a huge amount of data to the field operators.
Command ships can be scanned down and hunted. I am pretty sure the other side can have them as well. However, I do not think they should be of use when inside an active POS shield.
If I tried to make a type of coffee that made all of you happy, and you rated it, the group score for it would be about 60 out of 100. Break into 3 or 4 coffee clusters, and made coffee just for each cluster, the scores would go from 60 to 78. The difference between coffee at 60 and coffee at 78 is a difference between coffee that makes you wince or makes you happy. |
Whar Target
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 16:27:00 -
[144] - Quote
MadMuppet wrote:Command ships can be scanned down and hunted. I am pretty sure the other side can have them as well. However, I do not think they should be of use when inside an active POS shield.
I disagree. Having a POS should give certain tactical advantages. They should serve a greater purpose than making isk through moon mining and research. Especially considering the monthly cost of fuel blocks, which isn't a massive amount but still adds up.
I don't use a POS for boosting but I don't think it should be nerfed. |
Shameless Avenger
325
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 16:35:00 -
[145] - Quote
Do not forget to consider implications in all kinds of gameplay. Ninjas for example... it is difficult enough to get the bear to shoot at you as it is. Imagine if you have to show up at the mission's grid with the command ships behind you. "This is the Ninja. He will scan you down; he will salvage your wrecks and there shall be no aggro" ~ The Story of the Ninja |
Gevlin
SMANews.net SpaceMonkey's Alliance
179
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 17:33:00 -
[146] - Quote
The removal of Off grid boosting is removing " a play style" a play style that does have a counter - Scan down its But and shoot it.
The only hault to the counter is POS shields with the Brainstorm of No Shields to boost from with the new POS system, this should eliminate this barrier. On the other hand the boosting ship will be guarded by Guns if there was enough time to set up such a POS.
Removing off grid boosting period... would be dumbing down the game eliminating the possiblities of warfare, no need for scan boats, and its is just a slug fest in 1 location.
With off grid boosters a smaller fleet at least has 1 scanable target to go after with out having to face the blob at the gate if they can get free. (unless he is in a POS)
Some day I will have the internet and be able to play again. |
MadMuppet
Universal Freelance CONSORTIUM UNIVERSALIS
515
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 18:29:00 -
[147] - Quote
Whar Target wrote:MadMuppet wrote:Command ships can be scanned down and hunted. I am pretty sure the other side can have them as well. However, I do not think they should be of use when inside an active POS shield.
I disagree. Having a POS should give certain tactical advantages. They should serve a greater purpose than making isk through moon mining and research. Especially considering the monthly cost of fuel blocks, which isn't a massive amount but still adds up. I don't use a POS for boosting but I don't think it should be nerfed.
I see your point, and I agree with it somewhat, but the ability to hide a command ship in a bulletproof shell seems a lot like being able to use an AWACS while it is parked in an concrete reinforced hangar. If I tried to make a type of coffee that made all of you happy, and you rated it, the group score for it would be about 60 out of 100. Break into 3 or 4 coffee clusters, and made coffee just for each cluster, the scores would go from 60 to 78. The difference between coffee at 60 and coffee at 78 is a difference between coffee that makes you wince or makes you happy. |
Evei Shard
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
106
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 19:00:00 -
[148] - Quote
So.. let me see if I've got this right.
Some people want to have EvE changed so that command ships have to be on grid in order to be effective, but the primary concern is that they will be shot up because they don't have enough tank. So the immediate response, from some, is to buff the CS so they have more tank.
Please explain how "fit more tank" and "yield vs. tank" do not apply here? Profit favors the prepared |
lSD Banhammer
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 19:25:00 -
[149] - Quote
Thread lurked because HTFU - lSD Banhammer |
Gevlin
SMANews.net SpaceMonkey's Alliance
180
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 19:27:00 -
[150] - Quote
lurked? LOL Some day I will have the internet and be able to play again. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country
1726
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 19:40:00 -
[151] - Quote
Whar Target wrote:I can't imagine the number of lost subscriptions any on-grid booster nerf would result in.
Im going to go with none. |
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
440
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 19:59:00 -
[152] - Quote
Whar Target wrote:I can't imagine the number of lost subscriptions any on-grid booster nerf would result in.
Go ahead, whine and troll me for saying it, but it's the truth and CCP knows it.
It would also be another buff to blob warfare and a nerf to solo pvp.
The truth? Well CCP can carry on making the same mistake Mythic did with Buffbots in DAoC until they finally clued in they were gaining buffbot accounts at the expense of real players bailing on lame gameplay.
..and if running 2 or 3 accounts (Combat main, Booster, Falcon) is "solo" PvP, then I say nerf it! If that's solo, it wasn't worth keeping to begin with.
|
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
79
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 21:08:00 -
[153] - Quote
Aqriue wrote:lulz
Whiners whine when they can apply the same tactics against their enemy.
They chose to not put a command ship off grid, they lose, so its the fault of the other guy.
Yeah, that makes so much sense.
bad logic is bad
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Suddenly Forums ForumKings
Republic University Minmatar Republic
58
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 22:22:00 -
[154] - Quote
YUMAD BRO wrote:I have a great Idea....
How about you fking train it up on a char like everyone else and do it to??
you Fkn Downy..
LOLOLOLOLOLOL
|
MotherMoon
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
1047
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 23:22:00 -
[155] - Quote
Muad 'dib wrote:i hope ccp do introduce on grid boosting, because i will save a plex every month on my booster alt since i wont have to use boost links to be able to fight everyone also with boost links :D
Now would ccp want less plex sales, hmmmmmmmmmmm So your saying that, if the enemy fleet had 12 on grid boosters, you wouldn't bring yours? Yeah ok good luck with, have fun losing. http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg |
Eija-Riitta Veitonen
Unicorn Enterprise
24
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 23:26:00 -
[156] - Quote
Being a long-term command ship pilot for pvp alliance i can say: removing off-grid boosting abilities would require re-balancing the command ships so they at least can match the tanking ability of damnation, otherwise they would be pretty much useless in anything but small fights. |
MotherMoon
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
1047
|
Posted - 2012.07.28 23:28:00 -
[157] - Quote
REDNECKMINING wrote:If the OG bonuses are removed, the requirement for the Rorqual to be sieged in order to give out bonuses needs to be removed as well.
Just introduce off grid boosters. The catch being to.boost off grid, you have to enter a Seige type mode. http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg |
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
442
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 01:23:00 -
[158] - Quote
MotherMoon wrote: Just introduce off grid boosters. The catch being to.boost off grid, you have to enter a Seige type mode.
That would be a reasonable alternative to on-grid only boosting. I would add that near unprobability should also go. You shouldn't need a dedicated probing alt with billions in implants to scan a boosting T3.
|
Togg Bott
One Clone Gang
33
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 01:27:00 -
[159] - Quote
i am a CS pilot. i have never had a problem with putting my ship at risk. but i will say that since i fly the sleipnir, it would be nice to have a slightly better tank. maybe not as massive as the Damnation but enough that when combined with the sleipnirs speed i have atleast the survivability of the Damnation.
side note, i was really disappointed to find that all the time i spent skilling up for the CS was basicly tossed out the window when the T3 came along and made my ship obsolete. a Jack-Of-All-Trades should never be a good as a specificly tuned ship. |
MotherMoon
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
1048
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 02:44:00 -
[160] - Quote
Xorv wrote:MotherMoon wrote: Just introduce off grid boosters. The catch being to.boost off grid, you have to enter a Seige type mode.
That would be a reasonable alternative to on-grid only boosting. I would add that near unprobability should also go. You shouldn't need a dedicated probing alt with billions in implants to scan a boosting T3.
the nice part of having to go into seige mode is you might want to think about having a small defence fleet to protect the booster fleet. If the booster fleet couldn't move.
Do you think maybe t3 should be on grid only, on top of getting slightly nerfed bonuses since command ships should be better at boosting? I'm not quite sure where to go with it, but some kind of off grid boosting ship..... and a stronger on grid boost ships. maybe let them stack? one on grid and one off grid stacking together? thus giving an advantage to the side who brings more to risk? http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg |
|
Y'nit Gidrine
Gold Horizons Industrial
13
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 15:07:00 -
[161] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Y'nit Gidrine wrote:A lesser tank is not an issue if you have competent logi pilots.
Remember to give your logi pilots lots of love to help them grow big and strong! It does depend on the size of the blob. The coordinated F1-ing of 1400mm artillery can be very pronounced in their effects on a ship's structural integrity.
There are higher hp alternatives to command ships once fleet sizes have attained critical mass. People don't like risking ships, though.
Also, don't sit still at the enemy's optimal range. |
Freezehunter
241
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 15:56:00 -
[162] - Quote
Whar Target wrote:I can't imagine the number of lost subscriptions any on-grid booster nerf would result in.
Go ahead, whine and troll me for saying it, but it's the truth and CCP knows it.
It would also be another buff to blob warfare and a nerf to solo pvp.
It's not solo if you have alts/friends boosting you with huge bonuses safely off grid, stop talking out of your anus.
And no, no one but fail PVPers would quit because of that, and that is a good thing. Inappropriate signature, CCP Phantom. |
Freezehunter
241
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 15:58:00 -
[163] - Quote
Shameless Avenger wrote:Do not forget to consider implications in all kinds of gameplay. Ninjas for example... it is difficult enough to get the bear to shoot at you as it is. Imagine if you have to show up at the mission's grid with the command ships behind you.
Here's a thought: do real PVP instead of shooting mission runners like a ***. Inappropriate signature, CCP Phantom. |
Phill Esteen
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
87
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 16:30:00 -
[164] - Quote
Nerfing off-grid boosters will be yet another blow to small-gang pvp and varied gameplay. Think about it, if people are at risk of losing their boosting ships, they won't bring them at all, meaning that warfare links will become just yet another useless novelty mod in the market window. Not to mention all the unsubbed booster accounts.
If anything, the lesson we should be taking from off-grid boosters is that if EVE pvp is going to be saved from homogeneous mediocrity, more support roles should be moved off-grid or to a POS. Maybe then some people will actually start making use of the wide range of support ships EVE already includes, like logistics and Falcons, instead of just undocking in buffer battleships. GÇô postum faex est GÇô-á
never forget
|
Katalci
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
107
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 16:30:00 -
[165] - Quote
There is no reason to nerf offgrid ganglinks. It's already very impractical (and dangerous) to use for anything but solo; you're without links while the t3 is creating its safespot.
Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:How about a sig explosion when using boosters. Easier to scan down when you are putting out such massive electronic signals. Why do you want to nerf the on-grid Damnation into the ground? |
Beekeeper Bob
Beekeepers Anonymous
208
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 16:50:00 -
[166] - Quote
Katalci wrote:There is no reason to nerf offgrid ganglinks. It's already very impractical (and dangerous) to use for anything but solo; you're without links while the t3 is creating its safespot. Offgrid ganglinks greatly improve local tank, letting solo players engage greater odds than before -- nerfing offgrid nerfs solo. Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:How about a sig explosion when using boosters. Easier to scan down when you are putting out such massive electronic signals. Why do you want to nerf the on-grid Damnation into the ground?
Lol, since when is using "offgrid boosters" playing solo?
As someone with a command ship toon I say nerf the offgrid....Then I don't have to fly two ships in combat...
"CCP, is a cutting edge developer, they have found a way to sell lag to their customers, and make them believe it's a feature." |
Tobiaz
Spacerats
672
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 19:29:00 -
[167] - Quote
ElQuirko wrote:It should be on-grid only, but I agree this could lead to command ships being primaried. Therefore, they should have an increase of, say, 25% in the tank of command ships while engaging the boosters as well as the tank given by the boosters. While in small fights this could lead to having one tough nut to crack, in big fights it means that the 400+ alpha battleships don't just tear it to pieces in two volleys and so the logis have a little more time to react.
In the case of Gallente command ships, they just need a massive revamp.
Command ships already are some of the toughest cookies in the game. Not to mention that if they are going to be forced to be on-grid, large fleets will likely start building in some redundancy anyway.
Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!-á Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors! |
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
87
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 21:20:00 -
[168] - Quote
I've never really understood the complaining about this on grid/off grid stuff. The game is fairly well balanced in this regard with only a few exceptions.
Bottom line, what's is the complaint? That you come into a system and there is someone who is faster, has longer point, and stronger shield/armor than you? Well, simple. You bring a couple of Corps mates and spend the damn time and bring your own boosts. Two fleets that are boosting the same stuff in the same system have ZERO advantage over the other. The one current advantage one side may have over the other is that one might be in a POS. Ok, so i suppose CCP could make it that your not able to activate in a POS and its absolutely balanced.
If your unwilling to dedicate the time, corps mates, etc then make some friends. Solo be damned. If you want a truely fair 1v1 then arrange the fight and fleet up together to ensure no boosts are pushed. But at the end of the day the most fair way to make boosts works is to bring your own and it works the same way for everyone.
On grid boosting requirement is about the dumbest idea out there. Why? 1) all advantage lies with the defense as they can have their boosters well positioned on the field. 2) WTF is on grid anyway? Its so easy to jack with the grid, you just have to do some Fu and can easily kite a force off grid from its booster. 3) There is often action on more than one point of a system and if your defending multiple spots being forced to only one spot with current mechanics of fleet formation would limit options.
I think all the whining about this is people who just don't want to spend the time training leadership skills. I fleet boost and FC all the time from a T1 BC. Most the time I am on grid and target painting while I call primary and run two command links at the same time. I don't use an alt to do it. Look at my loss mails and you'll see them. So don't think I'm defending a tactic that I personally use. But the most balanced and fair way is very simple: Bring your own, its system wide, you figure out how to make it work. What I would change?
1. Sure can't activate in a POS just to shut up whiners. Again, I don't really think this is neccessary because again you can bring your own boosts and everything is equal in system. 2. Command ships need the +5 instead of the T3's and while some are beefy tank, some really suck. Ie, the Astarte and EOS blow. |
Beekeeper Bob
Beekeepers Anonymous
208
|
Posted - 2012.07.29 21:57:00 -
[169] - Quote
Mariner6 wrote:I've never really understood the complaining about this on grid/off grid stuff. The game is fairly well balanced in this regard with only a few exceptions.
Bottom line, what's is the complaint? That you come into a system and there is someone who is faster, has longer point, and stronger shield/armor than you? Well, simple. You bring a couple of Corps mates and spend the damn time and bring your own boosts. Two fleets that are boosting the same stuff in the same system have ZERO advantage over the other. The one current advantage one side may have over the other is that one might be in a POS. Ok, so i suppose CCP could make it that your not able to activate in a POS and its absolutely balanced.
If your unwilling to dedicate the time, corps mates, etc then make some friends. Solo be damned. If you want a truely fair 1v1 then arrange the fight and fleet up together to ensure no boosts are pushed. But at the end of the day the most fair way to make boosts works is to bring your own and it works the same way for everyone.
On grid boosting requirement is about the dumbest idea out there. Why? 1) all advantage lies with the defense as they can have their boosters well positioned on the field. 2) WTF is on grid anyway? Its so easy to jack with the grid, you just have to do some Fu and can easily kite a force off grid from its booster. 3) There is often action on more than one point of a system and if your defending multiple spots being forced to only one spot with current mechanics of fleet formation would limit options.
I think all the whining about this is people who just don't want to spend the time training leadership skills. I fleet boost and FC all the time from a T1 BC. Most the time I am on grid and target painting while I call primary and run two command links at the same time. I don't use an alt to do it. Look at my loss mails and you'll see them. So don't think I'm defending a tactic that I personally use. But the most balanced and fair way is very simple: Bring your own, its system wide, you figure out how to make it work. What I would change?
1. Sure can't activate in a POS just to shut up whiners. Again, I don't really think this is neccessary because again you can bring your own boosts and everything is equal in system. 2. Command ships need the +5 instead of the T3's and while some are beefy tank, some really suck. Ie, the Astarte and EOS blow.
Your argument makes no sense.....if everything is equal, then why wouldn't it be better for the ships to be on the field...equally?
"CCP, is a cutting edge developer, they have found a way to sell lag to their customers, and make them believe it's a feature." |
Gevlin
SMANews.net SpaceMonkey's Alliance
185
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 04:20:00 -
[170] - Quote
on grid boosters remind me of the old way of warfare with muskets. wihere everyone formed up in lines fired and then walk 2 paces and fire again.
then when the British had to fight Americans they they had to deal with Morons who would use cover and keep shooting their officers.
when removing the Off grid boosters all together it sounds like dumbing down the game to chivarly standards of the old British Musketiers
. With the POS Fix coming out in the future and the POS shields disappearing. The Boosting from a POS game breaking feature will be removed.
Many many more rorquals will end up dieing for it. Some day I will have the internet and be able to play again. |
|
Tobiaz
Spacerats
673
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 07:45:00 -
[171] - Quote
Gevlin wrote:on grid boosters remind me of the old way of warfare with muskets. wihere everyone formed up in lines fired and then walk 2 paces and fire again.
then when the British had to fight Americans they they had to deal with Morons who would use cover and keep shooting their officers.
when removing the Off grid boosters all together it sounds like dumbing down the game to chivarly standards of the old British Musketiers
. With the POS Fix coming out in the future and the POS shields disappearing. The Boosting from a POS game breaking feature will be removed.
Many many more rorquals will end up dieing for it.
It's the off-grid boosters that are the part dumbing down the game. It takes zero skill to maintain them and are a mandatory 'choice' for any fleet.
Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!-á Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors! |
Lyskal Oskold
Sefem Velox Swift Angels Alliance
745
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 07:51:00 -
[172] - Quote
Off-grid boosts are lame, lame like blobbing. They make carefree skirmish warfare lame too.
If you want bonuses for an entire fleet or to make insane roaming frigates, risk it by taking the booster too. Cry harder. Nerf it IMO. Pirates are red, buddies are blue, if you're unlucky enough to be orange, I'll f*cking kill you.I wonder if all the pickles in the forums are tax exempt? |
Durzel
The Xenodus Initiative.
26
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 08:07:00 -
[173] - Quote
For me what crystallises the debate is when someone says "it's not difficult you can do it yourself". That, to me, indicates that something is at the very least imbalanced. If you're fighting 1v1 and the other guy can do everything 30% better, but you can't see why and can't remove this advantage - then something is wrong imo. |
Molokhe
Little Giant Killers Illuminati.
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 16:26:00 -
[174] - Quote
Evei Shard wrote:So.. let me see if I've got this right.
Some people want to have EvE changed so that command ships have to be on grid in order to be effective, but the primary concern is that they will be shot up because they don't have enough tank. So the immediate response, from some, is to buff the CS so they have more tank.
Please explain how "fit more tank" and "yield vs. tank" do not apply here?
You could add "risk vs. reward" as well.
The thing that confuses me is the comments saying this would increase blobs. Wouldn't it be a case of less semi-afk Command Ship alts because if you want the bonuses, you'd have to switch some of your active pilots in your fleet to Command Ships? So the number of actual active ships wouldn't go up, unless the current situation is that most of the Command Ships aren't flown by alts of people in the main fleet?
|
Markus Reese
Incertae Sedis Cascade Imminent
255
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 19:03:00 -
[175] - Quote
Been out of this thread a bit, breezed over, so will cover a few points.
1. Small gang end of boosts - This is a falsitiy. Much like any other small gang warfare, you bring ships to match your fleet. The Commships can be fit to meet in with small gang. If you are worried about the cost, then you do what I did for years. T1 battlecruisers with a ganglink.
2. Alpha striked commships - Very valid. I think one major benefit would be if commships were also able to fit the lock breaker, or a proper antiblob mechanic. My thought was always a secondary "Ewar" effect that is caused by damage. As more damage is ensued, this value increases and damage falls off. Fluff would fit easily simply because of the energy/shrapnel/etc makes it harder to hit a ship. Related to sig size and damage mod. Topic for another thread though.
3. Alphastrike commships pt 2 - Need a bs sized booster possibly. Stronger than a commship and costs more, but maybe only two links or a slightly lesser bonus, dunno. Also people mentioned ganglink carriers, I have fits for those, they work nice within a capital fleet. |
Garreth Vlox
Sons Of 0din Dark Therapy
26
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 19:03:00 -
[176] - Quote
Gevlin wrote:At fan fest some dev mention a preference to have command ship command bonus requiring ships to be on grid.
My question are: With this not remove the Planet Hugging/Safe Spot hiding/POS staging Command ship or t3 cruiser which may have lesser of a tank? Will this not remove the role of the Combat Scanner Role in mega fleet fight that is to find out the location of these Ships? Will not change the Role of Command Bonus for Mining. Placing the Rorqual at the belt in Industrial mode? There for removing the need for a hauler at a belt. Due to the selection of ore coming out of the belts, the Rorqual has a hard time compressing ore unless it is at a POS with access to a corp hanger.
I am concerned about forcing a certain type play style over another.
May I recommend a compromise: Tech I Command modules can be off grid but Tech II Command Modules provide their Bonuses while on grid.
Forcing most command ships to be on grid does remove them from the game, because they get primaried and if fit to boost they die, FAST.
|
Durzel
The Xenodus Initiative.
26
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 19:11:00 -
[177] - Quote
Who primaries a Damnation first in any fight?
(admittedly not every command ships is a Damnation but I see no reason why the bonuses for the other fleet command ships can't be reworked to be similar) |
Bloutok
Murientor Tribe Defiant Legacy
5
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 20:26:00 -
[178] - Quote
Beekeeper Bob wrote:Mariner6 wrote:I've never really understood the complaining about this on grid/off grid stuff. The game is fairly well balanced in this regard with only a few exceptions.
Bottom line, what's is the complaint? That you come into a system and there is someone who is faster, has longer point, and stronger shield/armor than you? Well, simple. You bring a couple of Corps mates and spend the damn time and bring your own boosts. Two fleets that are boosting the same stuff in the same system have ZERO advantage over the other. The one current advantage one side may have over the other is that one might be in a POS. Ok, so i suppose CCP could make it that your not able to activate in a POS and its absolutely balanced.
If your unwilling to dedicate the time, corps mates, etc then make some friends. Solo be damned. If you want a truely fair 1v1 then arrange the fight and fleet up together to ensure no boosts are pushed. But at the end of the day the most fair way to make boosts works is to bring your own and it works the same way for everyone.
On grid boosting requirement is about the dumbest idea out there. Why? 1) all advantage lies with the defense as they can have their boosters well positioned on the field. 2) WTF is on grid anyway? Its so easy to jack with the grid, you just have to do some Fu and can easily kite a force off grid from its booster. 3) There is often action on more than one point of a system and if your defending multiple spots being forced to only one spot with current mechanics of fleet formation would limit options.
I think all the whining about this is people who just don't want to spend the time training leadership skills. I fleet boost and FC all the time from a T1 BC. Most the time I am on grid and target painting while I call primary and run two command links at the same time. I don't use an alt to do it. Look at my loss mails and you'll see them. So don't think I'm defending a tactic that I personally use. But the most balanced and fair way is very simple: Bring your own, its system wide, you figure out how to make it work. What I would change?
1. Sure can't activate in a POS just to shut up whiners. Again, I don't really think this is neccessary because again you can bring your own boosts and everything is equal in system. 2. Command ships need the +5 instead of the T3's and while some are beefy tank, some really suck. Ie, the Astarte and EOS blow. Your argument makes no sense.....if everything is equal, then why wouldn't it be better for the ships to be on the field...equally?
If it's all equal, why have any boosting ?
Remove boosting entirely. |
ugh zug
24
|
Posted - 2012.07.30 21:23:00 -
[179] - Quote
AraniFyr wrote:It should be on grid...too big of an advantage for such low risk
I agree.
Want me to shut up?-á Send me ISK and i'll stop giving suggestions to CCP that make sense. Remove content from my post, 15 bil Remove my content from a thread I have started 30bil. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page] |