| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
58
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:03:00 -
[31] - Quote
Quote:Besides stating the obvious, command ships can easily fit a gang link while maintaing good combat strength. You'll just have to make some choices.
LOL.
You guys would say anything to buff your blobs, wouldn't you?
Just get one of your many derp pilots to train a scanning ship, there are more to a fleet than just dps and tank. |

Takeshi Yamato
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
327
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:06:00 -
[32] - Quote
Rroff wrote:The way to go about this isn't to just kill off-grid boosting overnight - anyone who actually knows anything about boosting wouldn't even think to suggest this. I'm not gonna waste time going into the complex details as most of the opponents to off-grid boosting aren't interested in that and just want something gone that they don't have the ingenuity to deal with and/or don't want to have to put the effort in to fight at the same level.
The CSM fully agreed with CCP Yttterbium that off grid boosting should not exist. I guess they are all clueless in your view?
Won't you enlighten us with the complex details on why nobody with a clue would ever suggest to kill off grid boosting? An analysis: fixing active tanking in a logical manner: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1693846 |

Rroff
The Xenodus Initiative. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
27
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:06:00 -
[33] - Quote
Sheynan wrote: P.S: The same goes for small gangs, if you don't want to risk a T3/CS then boost from a standard BC, get half the boni and be happy with that.
Thats a good point actually its very easy to forget regular BCs can run a ganglink or 2. |

Sheynan
Lighting the blight
35
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:10:00 -
[34] - Quote
What if CCP removed the fleet booster restrictions and allowed every ship with an active gang link to contribute to the total fleet boost (in a way that the highest link in each category counts) together with making boosts on-grid ? |

Rroff
The Xenodus Initiative. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
27
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:14:00 -
[35] - Quote
Sheynan wrote:What if CCP removed the fleet booster restrictions and allowed every ship with an active gang link to contribute to the total fleet boost (in a way that the highest link in each category counts) together with making boosts on-grid ?
Its better imo to make it a tighter and more specialised part of the fleet structure, kind of how it is now but with more refinement - it encourages better preparedness for fights and higher levels of skill involved in fights. Most of the people I see vocally against off-grid boosting are the people who want to just go off half arsed into a fight with an adhoc fleet structure and they shouldn't really be suprised that someone better prepared will generally beat them, even when ostensibly outnumbered or outgunned, but they don't want to see it that way. |

Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
58
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:24:00 -
[36] - Quote
Takeshi Yamato wrote:Rroff wrote:The way to go about this isn't to just kill off-grid boosting overnight - anyone who actually knows anything about boosting wouldn't even think to suggest this. I'm not gonna waste time going into the complex details as most of the opponents to off-grid boosting aren't interested in that and just want something gone that they don't have the ingenuity to deal with and/or don't want to have to put the effort in to fight at the same level. The CSM fully agreed with CCP Ytterbium that off grid boosting should not exist. I guess they are all clueless in your view? Won't you enlighten us with the complex details on why nobody with a clue would ever suggest to kill off grid boosting?
The CSM?
You mean those owners of huge corps and alliances? The cause of blobbing in the first place?
Of course they would, those guys fear small gang warfare having any chance to succeed at all. |

Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
58
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:24:00 -
[37] - Quote
Rroff wrote:Sheynan wrote: P.S: The same goes for small gangs, if you don't want to risk a T3/CS then boost from a standard BC, get half the boni and be happy with that.
Thats a good point actually its very easy to forget regular BCs can run a ganglink or 2.
Yeah, with like no bonuses at all. Making them extremely weak. |

Rroff
The Xenodus Initiative. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
27
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:30:00 -
[38] - Quote
Diesel47 wrote:Rroff wrote:Sheynan wrote: P.S: The same goes for small gangs, if you don't want to risk a T3/CS then boost from a standard BC, get half the boni and be happy with that.
Thats a good point actually its very easy to forget regular BCs can run a ganglink or 2. Yeah, with like no bonuses at all. Making them extremely weak.
A drake with a T2 interdiction link gives a 28.13% increase to web and point range which is fairly useful, and if you have the mindlink on that char (granted not many people will have it in when flying a drake) its a 42.19% increase which is decent even without the racial bonus, likewise the shield resist link gives a +18.75% increase to resists without the mindlink which while not earth shattering is a nice increase to have - roughly equivalent to having an extra hardener - across your whole fleet thats a fairly decent increase in effectiveness and capability. |

Rroff
The Xenodus Initiative. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
27
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:33:00 -
[39] - Quote
Takeshi Yamato wrote:Rroff wrote:The way to go about this isn't to just kill off-grid boosting overnight - anyone who actually knows anything about boosting wouldn't even think to suggest this. I'm not gonna waste time going into the complex details as most of the opponents to off-grid boosting aren't interested in that and just want something gone that they don't have the ingenuity to deal with and/or don't want to have to put the effort in to fight at the same level. The CSM fully agreed with CCP Ytterbium that off grid boosting should not exist. I guess they are all clueless in your view? Won't you enlighten us with the complex details on why nobody with a clue would ever suggest to kill off grid boosting?
2 aspects to this, one as mentioned above the CSM has a good majority of representation from people who have fleet sizes where having an on-grid boosters is perfectly feasible and infact to their advantage and also acknowledging that it should not exist isn't the same as saying it should be removed.
|

Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
58
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:41:00 -
[40] - Quote
Rroff wrote:Takeshi Yamato wrote:Rroff wrote:The way to go about this isn't to just kill off-grid boosting overnight - anyone who actually knows anything about boosting wouldn't even think to suggest this. I'm not gonna waste time going into the complex details as most of the opponents to off-grid boosting aren't interested in that and just want something gone that they don't have the ingenuity to deal with and/or don't want to have to put the effort in to fight at the same level. The CSM fully agreed with CCP Ytterbium that off grid boosting should not exist. I guess they are all clueless in your view? Won't you enlighten us with the complex details on why nobody with a clue would ever suggest to kill off grid boosting? 2 aspects to this, one as mentioned above the CSM has a good majority of representation from people who have fleet sizes where having on-grid boosters is perfectly feasible and infact to their advantage and also acknowledging that it should not exist isn't the same as saying it should be removed - I think it was wrong it was implemented in this way in the first place but given how its developed its an entirely different matter to say it should be removed.
How is saying "it should not exist" not the same as "we need to remove it" ?
How can it not exist if it isn't removed?
If OGBs are removed, it will just make blobbing stronger than it already is.
Like I said in my thread, buff CS to have more tank.. let them keep their 3% bonus.
Keep the 5% bonus for T3s, limit their boosting to like 5 pilots. |

Takeshi Yamato
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
328
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:42:00 -
[41] - Quote
Rroff wrote:2 aspects to this, one as mentioned above the CSM has a good majority of representation from people who have fleet sizes where having on-grid boosters is perfectly feasible and infact to their advantage to remove off-grid boosting and also acknowledging that it should not exist isn't the same as saying it should be removed - I think it was wrong it was implemented in this way in the first place but given how its developed its an entirely different matter to say it should be removed.
I'm still waiting for the reasons as to why removing it would be bad. So far you have only said that
1) The CSM is biased
2) Off grid boosting developed in a certain way (which way? why does this make it a bad idea to remove off grid boosting?)
An analysis: fixing active tanking in a logical manner: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1693846 |

Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
59
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:49:00 -
[42] - Quote
Takeshi Yamato wrote:Rroff wrote:2 aspects to this, one as mentioned above the CSM has a good majority of representation from people who have fleet sizes where having on-grid boosters is perfectly feasible and infact to their advantage to remove off-grid boosting and also acknowledging that it should not exist isn't the same as saying it should be removed - I think it was wrong it was implemented in this way in the first place but given how its developed its an entirely different matter to say it should be removed. I'm still waiting for the reasons as to why removing it would be bad. So far you have only said that 1) The CSM is biased 2) Off grid boosting developed in a certain way (which way? why does this make it a bad idea to remove off grid boosting?)
Because when offgrid boosting is removed, the small gangs will have no chance against the blob with claymore who goes faster, points longer, align faster, and has 2 RR repping the claymore.
Small gangs warfare is already about to die, and this is just another unneeded buff to mindless blobbing. |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9109
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:51:00 -
[43] - Quote
Diesel47 wrote:Keep the 5% bonus for T3s, limit their boosting to like 5 pilots. I'm more in favour of making it show off the (admittedly not all that consistent) idea of T3 = versatile and making it a lower bonus, but which applies to a wider range of command modules, maybe even removing the racial bonuses entirely and just make it a flat [whatever]% on all links.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
CONCORD spawns: quick enough to save you?
|

Takeshi Yamato
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
328
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:53:00 -
[44] - Quote
Diesel47 wrote:Because when offgrid boosting is removed, the small gangs will have no chance against the blob with claymore who goes faster, points longer, aligns faster, and has 2 RR repping the claymore.
When offgrid boosting is removed, the pilots without a boosting alt will have a chance to engage more targets.
Diesel47 wrote:Small gangs warfare is already about to die, and this is just another unneeded buff to mindless blobbing.
That might have something to do with the entry ticket into competitive small gang warfare being an off grid boosting alt. An analysis: fixing active tanking in a logical manner: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1693846 |

Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
59
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:55:00 -
[45] - Quote
Takeshi Yamato wrote:Diesel47 wrote:Because when offgrid boosting is removed, the small gangs will have no chance against the blob with claymore who goes faster, points longer, aligns faster, and has 2 RR repping the claymore. When offgrid boosting is removed, the pilots without a boosting alt will have a chance to engage more targets.
That makes no sense. What does this even have to do with small gangs. |

Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4364
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:57:00 -
[46] - Quote
my idea:
ships that are not on-grid with your link ship get partial bonuses "WeGÇÖre a professional Merc Alliance, like PL" ~ snot shot, 2012 |

Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
59
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 15:59:00 -
[47] - Quote
Andski wrote:my idea:
ships that are not on-grid with your link ship get partial bonuses
Still buffs blobbing. |

Thien Long
Galaxy Punks Executive Outcomes
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 16:07:00 -
[48] - Quote
nullsec is blob vs blob, deal with it, its been like that for long time, small ganag in nullsec is to hit and run not to fight head on with a blob, i say ccp should fix this gang boosting to make only give bonus when it present WITH the fleet not in SS somewhere or pos, if they want bonus they have to risk it |

Sheynan
Lighting the blight
35
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 16:17:00 -
[49] - Quote
Diesel47 wrote:
Because when offgrid boosting is removed, the small gangs will have no chance against the blob with claymore who goes faster, points longer, aligns faster, and has 2 RR repping the claymore.
Small gangs warfare is already about to die, and this is just another unneeded buff to mindless blobbing.
Could you explain further how this would kill small gang warfare, I don't really see your point ?
|

Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
60
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 16:20:00 -
[50] - Quote
Thien Long wrote:nullsec is blob vs blob, deal with it, its been like that for long time, small ganag in nullsec is to hit and run not to fight head on with a blob, i say ccp should fix this gang boosting to make only give bonus when it present WITH the fleet not in SS somewhere or pos, if they want bonus they have to risk it
Another uninformed post by a pilot with no kills and two losses.
Null-sec is not just blob vs blob. You are wrong.
And small gangs can't "hit and run" like you say if the blob is getting bonuses while they aren't. |

Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
60
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 16:23:00 -
[51] - Quote
Sheynan wrote:
Could you explain further how this would kill small gang warfare, I don't really see your point ?
I could, but this guy from another thread did an amazing job of explaining why and how this will effect the small gangs.
Here it is:
Vytone wrote:Post with your main please. Unless ofcourse this is your main and in which case i would say how could you have the experience needed to understand what offgrid boosts mean to small gang pvp? I understand you only have 32 kills and 60 or so losses but you really should understand where some other pvpers are coming from through experience and not just, I hate offgrid boosters cause they can't take damage!, be a man!"
Dude some of us like to pvp outnumbered, or at least like having the ability to compete in pvp outnumbered since we find ourselves outnumbered very often. It's what makes Eve fun, that adrenaline rush during pvp. Now if an offgrid booster gives my gang of 10 the edge it needs to engage a gang of 60 or 70 then how is that imbalaced? If anything it helps to put Eve pvp back into balance.
The blob won't always win because of raw numbers anymore. If you force those boosters ongrid, it won't last 20 seconds, we all know that, but what we are really talking about here is if the small gang can successfully engage the big gang then the big gang must have inexperience, low sp player, pvp'ers with no imagination or intuitive thinking to counter those boosts.
In either case I say learn the game from someone who has some experience and stop whining about mechanics that were put in place rightfully so by CCP to help balance small gang vs. big gang pvp.
|

Takeshi Yamato
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
329
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 16:24:00 -
[52] - Quote
Diesel47 wrote:And small gangs can't "hit and run" like you say if the blob is getting bonuses while they aren't.
You know, people actually used combat fitted Claymores for fast gangs before off grid boosting became popular. An analysis: fixing active tanking in a logical manner: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1693846 |

ShiftyMcFly's Second Cousin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 16:30:00 -
[53] - Quote
Tippia wrote:... brain-barf edit: GǪin fact, in a sense, if you'd want to go that way, the solution would probably have to be rather backwards: you reduce the boost they give overall so that losing one won't make that much difference, but then we immediately go into Gǣso why bring one?Gǥ territory. I suppose you could fix that issue by making them generally appealing to fly for anyone, even the fleet CSes, so that the actual boosters can hide in the crowd of all those other people flying the same ship, only those others have filled up all their highs with tons of weaponry instead of command modules.
Make the current CS bonus a mod bonus to the gang-link that changes depending on what ship it is on.
Gang-Links: (racial aligned) 2% bonus on all tech 1 ships, except BCs 3% bonus on all tech 2 or 3 ships, or tech 1 BCs 5% bonus on all tech 2 BC hulls.
Fitting requirements should be sufficient enough to gimp any offensive capabilty. |

Thien Long
Galaxy Punks Executive Outcomes
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 16:34:00 -
[54] - Quote
Diesel47 wrote:Thien Long wrote:nullsec is blob vs blob, deal with it, its been like that for long time, small ganag in nullsec is to hit and run not to fight head on with a blob, i say ccp should fix this gang boosting to make only give bonus when it present WITH the fleet not in SS somewhere or pos, if they want bonus they have to risk it Another uninformed post by a pilot with no kills and two losses. Null-sec is not just blob vs blob. You are wrong. And small gangs can't "hit and run" like you say if the blob is getting bonuses while they aren't.
you cant be serious right? please ok? my point in this problem is if they want a fleet bonus they have to have that ship present with the fleet, so you or anyone decide to kill it atleast u can, as of right now you dont have that option. |

Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
60
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 16:36:00 -
[55] - Quote
Takeshi Yamato wrote:Diesel47 wrote:And small gangs can't "hit and run" like you say if the blob is getting bonuses while they aren't. You know, people actually used combat fitted Claymores for fast gangs before off grid boosting became popular. I know because I flew in them. All your ideas about off grid boosting being REQUIRED for solo and small gang pvp are just fantasy. And you completely ignore the deleterious effects of off grid boosters elsewhere.
No they aren't. Explain to what a small gang can do when they try to fight a larger gang that has command ships on field that will never die due to massive tanks and reps? Besides having that extra 2% boost from from their tengu, they are at a very very massive disadvantage. Once the blobs realize this the small gangs will have no chance.
I think OGBs should never be removed, but tengus should be nerfed to only boost something like 5 pilots and no OGBs can boost inside a POS.
And exactly what are these "deleterious effects" of OGBs that are elsewhere? |

Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
1485
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 16:43:00 -
[56] - Quote
ban off grid boosting ban npc corps |

Takeshi Yamato
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
331
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 16:58:00 -
[57] - Quote
OGB has no place in a good pvp game.
It makes as much sense as off grid remote repping and off grid remote EWAR. An analysis: fixing active tanking in a logical manner: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1693846 |

Rroff
The Xenodus Initiative. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
27
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 16:59:00 -
[58] - Quote
I don't think I presented my views very clearly and probably misinterpreted the angle some people are coming from.
I not against removing off-grid boosting as such, I just see a lot of people who want it gone at any cost with no interest in what impact that has to gangboosting - if it killed it entirely that would be all the better for them, but theres probably some people who want it moved properly to ongrid boosting that I'm mistaking for the previously mentioned people. What I don't want to see, and why I'm vocally opponent to a direct removal of off-grid boosting is a knee jerk reaction that sees off-grid boosting killed without the impact of that change balanced out.
For instance say you decided to go with a fleet based around a core of guardians and proteus and get the most from that gang:
Prots - small sig, point range bonus, need to get in close to do their work best so anything that increases their speed would be good.
Guardians - small sig, work best with an afterburner for damage reduction but that reduces their ability to pull range - so anything that can decrease their sig further and increase the damage reduction and speed of their propulsion would be good.
We have the armor aspect covered with a legion or damnation while not ideal they can survive on grid with their massive EHP and good resists and do some, if not the most useful dps so the pilot has something to do in the fight atleast.
Skirmish links provide a bonus to point range, decreased sig and increased speed and agility, the perfect setup to get the most out of this gang... however we then have to look at the options for proper skirmish link boosting (assuming at this point we are restricted to on-grid boosters) - the ships are pretty much restricted to either the claymore or loki.
The claymore is bonused to and focused around shield tanking, it only has 4 low slots, it has a BC sized sig, armor tanked its lumbering with patchy resists and not the most EHP on its armor buffer - not really the ship to fit in with our gang composition and doctrine.
The loki struggles to fit 3x links and you can't spare any fitting for guns or any other useful mods, most of its slots are taken up with fitting modules and to get any kind of tank and propulsion on it means throwing a lot of ISK on pimp.
So we end up with a ship that needs a lot of hands on while not directly doing anything significant from the pilots point of view in terms of engagement with the action, which also isn't ideal in a small gang when the gang booster could be running an alt for off-grid with minimal hands on and a main for actual combat.
This is why I'm against a knife to the heart of off-grid boosting and prefer to see on-grid boosting made more effective before any changes to off-grid is made. |

Takeshi Yamato
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
331
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 17:03:00 -
[59] - Quote
Rroff wrote:I don't think I presented my views very clearly and probably misinterpreted the angle some people are coming from.
I not against removing off-grid boosting as such, I just see a lot of people who want it gone at any cost with no interest in what impact that has to gangboosting - if it killed it entirely that would be all the better for them
You're over dramatizing. I played before OGB became popular and gangboosting was just doing fine back then. You actually had to make some choices rather than bringing a 6 ganglink monster that does everything at virtually no risk.
Rroff wrote:The loki struggles to fit 3x links and you can't spare any fitting for guns or any other useful mods, most of its slots are taken up with fitting modules and to get any kind of tank and propulsion on it means throwing a lot of ISK on pimp.
Then adapt and use less links. Your opponents will have the same limitations that you do.
An analysis: fixing active tanking in a logical manner: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1693846 |

Varesk
Origin. Black Legion.
134
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 17:04:00 -
[60] - Quote
Cant wait for mining boosters to be on grid. Goodbye capital industrial ships...
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |