Off grid boosting should not exist

1st argument: "If off grid boosting is no longer possible, then small gangs won't have gang links anymore."

No ****, they were designed to be that way. Bringing a fully fledged fleet booster only makes sense for gangs of a certain size.

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.

Mr. Yamamoto, promoting blobbing since 2012

What really promotes blobbing is the ****** attitude of being averse to combat on an even playing field.

A is a 200-man alliance, and they want to go out for some pew with their matesmatesmates. After 1.5 hours of desperate efforts of forming up, their fleet is 15 pilots, 20 Guardians and a couple of fleet command ships.

B is a 10-man corp, who have been roaming around all this time in their 6-guy "fleet", happily pewing their space enemies in similar gangs, supported by an OGB alt played by the FC who also triples as the scout and logii.

A & B meet, B are happy to engage as the links will improve their chances to get some kills and not get instapwned by the A blob.

Anyway, I'm here to take a closer look at some of the rationalizations. There are roughly:

2nd argument: "Removing off grid boosting will hurt solo and small gang pvp."

The existence of off grid boosting divides the playing field into two groups: those who have an off grid booster and those who don't. The first group is massively advantaged. This is not good for the health of solo and small gang PvP.

Removing the advantage will level the playing field and allow more players to compete on even ground (and that's precisely what some of these off grid boosting alts are afraid of).

I agree, offgrid boosting is a bad mechanic. But your rationale against the 2nd argument is flawed...

The existance of Falcons divides the playing field into two groups...
The existance of RR divides the playing field into two groups...

Most specialty ships divide the field into the haves and have nots, if one side "haves not". The side that doesn't have the specialty ships relied on poor intel when they engaged.

And C decides to blob because it stands no chance against B otherwise, while D decides it would rather stay docked than fight B. This is why B has no choice but to engage blobs because other targets are scarce.

It's the same bullshit as with Falcon alts. Everybody had to have a Falcon alt because everbody else had a Falcon alt. The Falcon alt apologists used the exact same justification too "we need it to fight the blob!".

It's easy, really. Change the price, and rebalance the command ships accordingly. Make it cheaper than a T2 cruiser hull, reduce their defensive capabilies and make them decent offensive ships with on-grid boosting capabilities far better than BC's.

Why not instead of nerfing off-grid boosting, increase the incentive to put them on-grid?

Because between choosing to risk losing the ship and its fleet-wide benefits (for a damnation, that can easily equate to millions of HP on the field across even a small subcap fleet) and not having those benefits go away three seconds into the fight, anyone with a bit of sense will choose the latter.

You'll have to take into consideration that these are prime targets that will be evaporated once the numbers go up. The on-grid benefits would have to be ridiculously large to outweigh that and that completely breaks them at the lower-end of the fleet size spectrum.

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.

I think you are too much focused on actual command ships to do the job.

EVE allows fleet boosts to be fitted on: tier1/2 BCs, CSs, T3s, Carriers and Titans.

If a fleet is that large that they have to fear having their booster exploded instantely, then maybe they should go with less, but safer boosts p.ex on capitals, or better hidden boosts (Try finding the 3 boosting drakes or the boosting T3 in a pile of several hundred without metagaming). The choices are already present in the game, people just don't want to accept the downsides.
Or you could always bring more commandships than the enemy can destroy in reasonable time.


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.

My Rorqual is an off gride booster. So don't touch nothing basterds.

I think you are too much focused on actual command ships to do the job.

EVE allows fleet boosts to be fitted on: tier1/2 BCs, CSs, T3s, Carriers and Titans.

If a fleet is that large that they have to fear having their booster exploded instantely, then maybe they should go with less, but safer boosts p.ex on capitals, or better hidden boosts (Try finding the 3 boosting drakes or the boosting T3 in a pile of several hundred without metagaming). The choices are already present in the game, people just don't want to accept the downsides.
Or you could always bring more commandships than the enemy can destroy in reasonable time.

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.

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.

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.

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 ?

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?

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.

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.

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?)

Keep the 5% bonus for T3s, limit their boosting to like 5 pilots.

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.

When offgrid boosting is removed, the pilots without a boosting alt will have a chance to engage more targets.

my idea:

ships that are not on-grid with your link ship get partial bonuses

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.

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

Could you explain further how this would kill small gang warfare, I don't really see your point ?

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.

And small gangs can't "hit and run" like you say if the blob is getting bonuses while they aren't.

...
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.

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 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.

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

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.

If you actually went to lowsec and did FW where a good portion of kills are solo kills, you'll quickly discover that there are many people with an off grid boosting alt that you cannot win against unless you bring your own off grid boosting alt.

How do people deal with that?

- They stop flying solo and start flying in gangs.
- They start avoiding fights with pilots they know have an off grid booster alt.
- They get their own off grid booster alt just to stay on the same level.
- They stop pvp'ing in disgust.

This is how off grid boosters are killing real small scale pvp.

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.

I have to ask, as a noob, but how is it balanced to allow a 10 man fleet be as powerful as a 30 man fleet?

1st argument: "If off grid boosting is no longer possible, then small gangs won't have gang links anymore."

No ****, they were designed to be that way. Bringing a fully fledged fleet booster only makes sense for gangs of a certain size.

Besides stating the obvious, command ships and battlcruisers can easily fit a gang link while maintaing good combat strength. You'll just have to make some choices.

2nd argument: "Removing off grid boosting will hurt solo and small gang pvp."

The existence of off grid boosting divides the playing field into two groups: those who have an off grid booster and those who don't. The first group is massively advantaged. This is not good for the health of solo and small gang PvP.

Removing the advantage will level the playing field and allow more players to compete on even ground (and that's precisely what some of these off grid boosting alts are afraid of).

Addendum: a popular variation of this argument is "gang links let us fight the blob". While gang links are a force multiplier, it goes both ways: a gang without an off grid booster is heavily disadvantaged when facing an equally sized gang with such a booster.

4th argument: "Off grid boosting is not wrong per se"

Off grid boosters directly influence the outcome of a battle without ever being present on grid. Every other ship in EVE must be present on grid to do the same (the one exception are fighters, but they can be shot down). Off grid boosting is clearly outside of the normal combat paradigm.

So what, removing OGBs won't solve anything.

If that guy loses his OGB he will just get a falcon alt, or a neutral RR alt, or just bait you into getting blobbed.

How do you deal with a falcon if you are solo and one appears and permajams you? You don't.

The problem here isn't OGBs, its the fact that people can buy alts to help them and that will never change... OGB nerf or not, people who appear "solo" will always trick you into traps.

True solo pvp is hard, it was never meant to be easy. Removing OGBs won't make it any easier for you.




And this isn't the stuff I was talking about. I'm more worried about what will happen to the small gangs of pilots who like to fight outnumbered vs blobs. Now that is a true challenge and very fun if you pull it off. And the OGB is a MAJOR part of them being able to do something like this without 100% failing every time.

If OGBs are removed then this style of small gang pvp is also doomed. That is what I'm worried about.




Another uninformed post. You are just proving my point that all these arguments are made by people that have no clue what they are saying.

OGBs ARE killable, they can be scanned down and killed. That is a VERY viable option and it happens more than you think.

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.

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.

I disagree with you, and you are stupid and lazy.

Fleet boosting is BORING, BO-RING, it's an alt's work.

Just because YOU did something, sometime ago doesn't mean the game should change because YOU think it should.

There are more players other than YOU.


And you are showing another reason why I don't take you guys seriously, thinking that a 6 link ganglink T3 can boost with no risk just shows how little you actually know.

A 6 link booster "monster" will be a very hard fit and it will have literally no way to become harder to probe. Even a novice prober can find this guy in seconds and have interceptors flying in to kill him. OGBs are expensive and losing them is huge blow, using them is never "risk free" unless you are not smart enough to counter them.

I see it now, all the people who think OGBs are "OP" are too uncreative or too lazy to counter them.

scan down? lol ur joking? what IF hes in the pos can you do anything? ur a pvper as u seem you are, but ur asking me to scan it down while im getting my ass beat up? do u even know what ur talking about? like the booster alt just stand there for you to scan it down and kill it.

i dont ask for it to be remove, im asking CCP to fix it that fleet only get bonus if the booster at the same position with the fleet.

What if said monster booster is in NPC corp and in Hi sec boosting for a war decking corp? How is it then fair? Should he be flagged red as he is helping the fleet

Hi-sec PvP...

lol.

GǪinterestingGǪ

Just to keep them special, though, what would happen if you gave all BCs a fitting bonus to Command Processors? With that suggestion, all ships can fit the actual links, but BCs will always be able to fit more.

I dont do it but I can see this being abused there. So while we are talking about boosting it is worth bringing up.

idk, I guess the ship should go red to the guys in hi-sec so they have a chance of killing it..


I DO remember people in incursions using ships to suicide gank OGBs of other gangs, and the general idea was it was worth it. It was pretty easy too because they were so squishy and couldn't fit tanks.


But for balancing pvp in 0.0 and lowsec, hi-sec shouldn't even be considered imo.

it isn't, that's why the most accomplished single player PVPers like Garmon loudly advocate removal of off grid boosters and npc corp members think its a great feature hth

to Diesel47, ur telling peoples learn how to fight, i say you should learn how to pvp without ur booster alt, u seem to be afraid of losing it.

3rd argument: "Off grid boosting is good for CCP's wallet"

First, let's put this into perspective: this is thinly disguised and selfish "I'll quit if you nerf my off grid boosting alt" blackmailing.

For us players who don't have access to CCP's statistics, it's impossible to know whether this will harm or benefit subscription numbers.

That said, I doubt that the type of player keeping an off grid boosting alt will stop using a second account. They want every advantage they can get, and even with off grid boosting removed, there are so many ways a second account remains useful. Personally I'm convinced that in the long term, it will be an extremely positive change for the game.

And this isn't the stuff I was talking about. I'm more worried about what will happen to the small gangs of pilots who like to fight outnumbered vs blobs. Now that is a true challenge and very fun if you pull it off. And the OGB is a MAJOR part of them being able to do something like this without 100% failing every time.

If OGBs are removed then this style of small gang pvp is also doomed. That is what I'm worried about.

As always in this type of message, OP ignore arguments he can't deny. Fleet boosting is BORING, BO-RING, it's an alt's work. By putting it on grid we just have one more ship to protect that can't do anything else than tank the focus that will irremediably fall on it. If I remember well, I heard the terms "flying brick".

I have a cleaner, more simple solution: Buff active-tanking modules to be as effective as they are with ganglinks currently, but make ganglinks not affect local tanks.

Boosting alts, pffGǪ

Real pilots have 15M leadership SP on their mains.

how about 10.000 km limit to the range ?

What I genunely can't understand is why people do assume that blobs don't have OGB themselves these days? More people in that blob, better chance of someone having OGB alt (and actually better chance that people from larger groups will think of OGB needs even if they don't have it).

If something in the game is alt's work, that thing is broken. I agree that boosting is boring, but when I think of solutions, first one that comes to mind is "make command ships fun to fly", not "let them use alts".

...couldn't fit tanks.

Hi, just checking in with some logic here

removing off grid links will nerf small gangs and keep larger gangs at same strenght

a smaller gang wont be able to hold their links on field like a larger gang would... (that is my reasoning)

Off grid is off grid and unacceptable.

We don't have off grid remote repping, off grid ewar or anything like that for obvious reasons.

Why should gang links be the exception? It's common sense that OGB shouldn't exist.

And a smaller gang won't be able to keep their logistics or their ewar ships on the field against a larger gang. Let's make those off grid too according to your logic?

You only accept OGB as the norm because you rely on it and it has existed for so long, not because it makes any sense whatsoever.

You cannot expect to not be disadvantaged against a larger gang.

How is it common sense? I haven't seen a single reason why links should be on grid. What about covops scout, why are they allowed to give warpins to fleet and not be on grid?

If you can understand why off grid ewar and off grid logistics are ridiculous and wrong then you can understand why off grid boosting is ridiculous and wrong.

Of course, this is not a question of intelligence but of emotional attachment and there are none so blind as those who don't want to see.

If you can understand why off grid ewar and off grid logistics are ridiculous and wrong then you can understand why off grid boosting is ridiculous and wrong.

Of course, this is not a question of intelligence but of emotional attachment and there are none so blind as those who don't want to see.

The answer of course is more modules.

Add some new fancy EWAR command link disruption. If people want to make the choice to bring OGB to the system, then you can make the choice to bring disruption and deny them their bonus. Or don't, and deal with the possibility of harder to kill ships.

Take it a step further and maybe make the command link disruption less effective if command links are on-grid.

I'm fine with removing off grid boosting so long as they balance boosting t3s/commandships in the process

oh whats that, the latter wont happen?

didnt think so

I'm against the fact small gangs will get hit harder than large fleets, this is no good for the game

Battlecruisers can fit gang links but how many of those do you see fitted with? -mechanic and ships related need changes.

At that point it would be better to remove gang links alltogether and refund the SP.

No that's just a compromise along the lines of "just a little off grid remote repping would be OK" and "neutral RR is OK as long as you don't use more than 1 or 2 reps".

I fully support this initiative to have rorquals sat on-grid in belts with mining ships.

Not only are they on-grid, they are also deployed, and so are going nowhere for the next, oh, about 10 minutes or so.

Mining Command ships and mining links it's another discussion in OGB discussion, keeping them system wide only for mining links it's not a problem for the game at all, offensive/defensive links are.

Mining Command ships and mining links it's another discussion in OGB discussion, keeping them system wide only for mining links it's not a problem for the game at all, offensive/defensive links are.

As I've said many times, it will also let small gangs or solo players that had no access to OGB fight similarly sized gangs or other solo players that were previously impossible to take on due to having OGB.

So this is just as much an argument for the removal of OGB as it as an argument against the removal.

There are no small gangs or solo players without access to OGB.

That's the fault in your line of thinking.

Falcon is the Caldari recon ship, specializing in Electronic Counter Measures, a powerful type of electronic warfare. Maybe you are confused about what gang links are?

Just to clear it for you: Warfare Links are not EWAR or RR.

[quote=Roime] The Falcon alt apologists used the exact same justification too "we need it to fight the blob!".

It's a "powerful type of electronic warfare" but even ECM was nerfed severely in its range to bring the Falcon much closer to the fight.

So because there is almost no downside to having an OGB, at some point in near future everyone will have one.
So why don't we just remove boosting altogether and just increase all stats for the missing amount...

Boosting from an off-grid spot is just too much of a no-brainer to be kept in the game.

But they fill the same purpose of being a force multiplier that is not a direct damage dealing ship and as such there is no reason to treat them any different when it comes to changing them.

Is there a problem with all fleets having a booster?

Except they don't fill the same purpose. All gang links do is boost the fleet's basic stats, like tank, mobility, sensor strength and tackle range, they don't do anything like jam ships or repair armor. Not sure why this is so difficult to understand.

My suggestion for rebalancing:

-Create a sig bloom for active gang links

My suggestion for rebalancing:

-Swap the T3/Fleet Command Ship bonus to ganglinks.
-Create a sig bloom for active ganglinks, as on an MWD. Perhaps 500% to begin with, so that offgrid boosters can be probed down more easily.
-Block boosting within POS shields.

Solves the problem of ganglink invulnerability, makes fleet command ships more viable, doesn't nerf T3s into the ground, and uses mechanisms that already exist within the game, which should hopefully make it cheap and easy to implement.

If everyone has one what would be the point of having gang links at all ?



Of course they do, take a boosting legion for example. The rapid repair gang link alone boosts every guadian in the fleet by 50%, so if you fly with 4 guardians...swoosh suddenly you have effectively 6.
And this is just one link. With all armor links you can almost double the total defenses of any guardian fleet.


And this kind of power increase that is done by just one ship multiboxed on a safespot somewhere has to be in more danger for the amount it changes the outcome of fights, thus ongrid.

Because between choosing to risk losing the ship and its fleet-wide benefits (for a damnation, that can easily equate to millions of HP on the field across even a small subcap fleet) and not having those benefits go away three seconds into the fight, anyone with a bit of sense will choose the latter.

You'll have to take into consideration that these are prime targets that will be evaporated once the numbers go up. The on-grid benefits would have to be ridiculously large to outweigh that and that completely breaks them at the lower-end of the fleet size spectrum.

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.

But I ask again, is having a cloaked scout also wrong? It provides way more tangible benefits, and is completely indestructible?

No, you still have effectively only 4 Guardians, and the exact same amount of remote repairers. They just rep more and use less cap.

Nice fit, but you need the Virtue set and another grav cap rig to probe out unprobeable OGBs!

:D

Why not just use all in one?

[Tengu, personal assistant]

Co-Processor II
Co-Processor II
'Aura' Warp Core Stabilizer I

Command Processor I
Command Processor I
Command Processor I
Prototype ECCM Gravimetric Sensor Cluster
Prototype ECCM Gravimetric Sensor Cluster
Prototype ECCM Gravimetric Sensor Cluster

Siege Warfare Link - Active Shielding II
Siege Warfare Link - Shield Harmonizing II
Skirmish Warfare Link - Evasive Maneuvers II
Skirmish Warfare Link - Rapid Deployment II
Sisters Expanded Probe Launcher, Sisters Combat Scanner Probe I
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II

Medium Processor Overclocking Unit I
Medium Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I
Medium Low Friction Nozzle Joints I

Tengu Defensive - Warfare Processor
Tengu Electronics - Emergent Locus Analyzer
Tengu Engineering - Capacitor Regeneration Matrix
Tengu Offensive - Covert Reconfiguration
Tengu Propulsion - Interdiction Nullifier

Garnish with a talon set (omega not required for an 1:1 sig radius/sensor strength ratio), 3 poteque implants for better probing and a warfare mindlink to your liking and there you go: Next to unprobable, warpcore stabbed, interdiction nullified Cov Ops cloaked bonused prober with 4 warfare links - the tank is a little thin, but far better than my Anathema's and actually, it's easier to fly thanks to the interdiction nullifier - not sure if it's required - only lost an Anathema once to a smartbombing BS at a gate.

Considering it took me 5 minutes to throw that fit together and people can certainly do better than that, things like the above fit are totally fubar and should never have been possible.

lol - that fit would never work ongrid - get a boosting alt and learn how to do it, noob.

lol - that fit would never work ongrid - get a boosting alt and learn how to do it, noob.

Good advice and a fitting name.

I agree with you in this overall. Problem is the invulnerability of the current off grid boosters. I have always pictured Command Ships being just that. COMMAND SHIPS. They provide fleets with extra benefits and thus in order to retain those benefits they should be protected more by ECM and Logi ships in the fleet.

The primary problem right now is that fleet booster ships are never actually IN the fleet or a part of the fight. They are an invisible and invulnerable unknown entity providing a tactical advantage. The bigger the fleet the more advantage the booster provides and the more unbalanced it becomes.

It's a double edged sword...and there is no easy fix.

pretty sure that most of the complaints towards off-grid boosting are w/r/t off-grid skirmish-boosting lokis rather than legions/tengus running tanking links

I could be wrong, though

I rather enjoy giving random local miners orca buffs but that only works cause off grid buffs work :(


Oh well guess I was buffing the competition anyway..

At least charge them some isk for the privilege!

While I'm all for removing off-grid gang links it would have to be preceded by balancing the different command ships first. The Damnation can get a whole lot more EHP than the Vulture and while I fly Amarr that still not "fair".

You ignore those caldari sonbitches and focus on fixing Gallente leadership first. Not just the command ships, but everything. I mean, come on, Information Warfare? If you want to bring EWAR, you'll bring a falcon, which can jam errything just fine without links. Switch it to something like Damage Warfare and then make the Astarte and the Eos actually viable boats.

Another one sided argument ....

Theres more to this game that running around in T1 frigates complaining about OGB

So what you going to do about ships like the Rorqual that by design have to OGB while
they cannot move when in deployed mode .... that's right .... doh!

As I have already said .... remove all OGB apart from the Rorqual !

Another one sided argument ....

Theres more to this game that running around in T1 frigates complaining about OGB

So what you going to do about ships like the Rorqual that by design have to OGB while
they cannot move when in deployed mode .... that's right .... doh!

As I have already said .... remove all OGB apart from the Rorqual !

High sec and null sec carebears whining about off grid boosters because they don't know how to train scanning alts up. More news at 11!


P.S. Blob more guys, it's kind of cute.

If you like that much playing alone you should play Tetris or Pacman, not an MMORPG On Line. So when OGB is gone are you going to pollute this forum with your tears or are you just going to man up and actually start playing with other players?

Boosting alts, pffGǪ

Real pilots have 15M leadership SP on their mains.

Real pilots don't play with alts at all....

Right, the anger is focused on non-mining links.

Even if OGB was removed, you could still put a tier 1 BC with mining links on grid and continue using the Rorqual for ore compression.

It doesn't make any sense though that the Rorqual should be required to use its Industrial Core in order to provide bonuses. That could be changed.

Real pilots don't exist.

Buzz Aldrin might disagree with you there..

And I suppose Buzz Aldrin has 15m leadership SP, does he? With no alts?

The best part about you assuming this is the fact that I don't have a booster alt and when I run in gangs, we usually don't use links. So try again, little carebear, and keep whining about OGBs because you don't know how to train a scanning alt or no one in your fleets know how to train scanning on their mains.

This was entertaining

Would you mind answering the question? -when OGB is off will you quit?

Just a variation of the "off grid boosting is good for small gangs" delusion.

What really promotes blobbing is the ****** attitude of being averse to combat on an even playing field. That's the same motivation that drives people to use off grid boosting too.

So yes, I have no doubt that some players who are incapable of adapting will resort to blobbing when they can't get an advantage through their off grid boosting alts anymore.

The rest will just adapt and get over it.

If you want me to take you serious then post with your main, if this is your main then LMFAO.

It makes no difference all these threads. CCP has consistently said they don't want off-grid boosting. In fact they even stated it years ago before the tech IIIs were introduced. But hell if I'm going to dig through the terrible search engine on the old forums for when and who said it. It went something like - we want to eliminate the pos'd up command ship running boosts but presently it is too difficult to code. Apparently someone(s) starting to figure out how to change the coding to eliminate system wide boosting, or probably more correctly enable proximity boosting.