I have more than one Booster alt and to be honest, the fact I can't boost from within a POS anymore when in my home-system, while annoying, is still bearable.
Plus, in the future you can't boost on station either, because you WILL die, since those warfare modules will apparently refresh a weapons time of sorts (like agression) which won't allow you to insta-dock or jump. But I can work around that...somehow.

I don't see the problem with command ships, especially once 1.1 hits. They're tanky and the buff they are getting is huge enough to be worth abused as much as chicks on bread. The problem I see with is with T3 boosts, since "yay we lowered fitting reqs. for warfare modules", but not for the damn processor. And THAT is the main bottleneck. the T3s are supposed to bonus THREE different types, so why would you ever expect a T3 to run around with a single link??? Give the warfare subsytem the same bonus that command ships have, aka fitting 3 links natively. That should fix a LOT of things. Especially the "tank" aspect, since I can't see T3 boosts EVER on grid, since well, you can't have a decent boosting T3 AND have a tank to sustain more than destroyer dmg.
If you wish to nerf T3 boosts that much, might as well remove them, because current state, they don't belong on-grid, due to the fittings.

The reduction in boost strength is acceptable. i put us roughly where we were before the introduction of T2 links. And let's face it, back then, it was already so much better than not having boosts.

tl;dr:
T3 Warfare subsystem to natively be able to fit 3 links, as Command Ship counterparts. Then you get about same EHP/Boost trade-off than CS and at least you can bring them on grid.
also, titan boosts? Since Rorqual boosts are allowed IN-POS, because well, the ship isn't suited for effing around warps in system, how about titan boosts?

The weapons timer is not going in with 1.1, nor do we know for sure if it's ever going to go in.

The Command Processors are probably going to get a revamp as well just not for 1.1. Currently it looks like they're going to turn into rigs of some kind but they may also just make a low-slot version (both of these are ideas Fozzie has put forward or commented on)

I commented according to Fozzie's wording at the time of my post.
For stuff like timer i know and therefoe mentioned "in the future".

Moving Command processors to lowslots doesn't help jack, because fitting requirements would still not allow you to fit a decent tank. The problem is that you won't be able to have a T3 on grid. you could, if the subsystem would get the same 3 link allowance as the CS counterpart has.
And then its a trade choice of "3 different bonus @ 2%/level" or "2 different bonus @ 3%/level" on grid... sounds solid.

Gee, it almost sounds like they're forcing you to make trade-offs with T3s being more generalized and "I can boost if we need it" and Command Ships being a more focused booster rather than the generalist T3.

When they finally move boosts on-grid it's likely that T3s will only boost in T3 gangs with each ship fitting a different link.

Fozzie already commented on the T3s issue saying they weren't interested in making 6-link T3 boosting easier at the moment.

And they shouldn't make 6 links more easy. If you fit 6 links on a CS, you'll trade a huge portion of your survivability. the same applies for T3s, and rightly so. But trading survivability up to being uttterly squishy for 3 links is just plain NO. should be the same.

where's the sandbox we used to play in? How will having 3 T3s with a command subsystem each, to carry one link each, benefit ANY T3 gang... We don't all fly in 10+ gangs, to be honest, and having to slot 3 people into squad-co, wing-co and fleet-co just for 3 measly links is the equivalent of a word that won't make it through censor.
I can put up with all of those changes to the ships and modules, no matter how bad of game design they might be, in the past and present and probably the future, but as I said, you might as well removing boosting from T3s, if the goal is to put them on field but they will only be viable with one link / ship.
Hence, I am hoping Fozzie in all his wisdom might consider this.

People who hate off-grid booster because they can't use them just see the disadvantage they have. But booster brought much more fun to PvP. The main problem in EVE is that solo players or small gangs will be pwned by bigger fleets with logistics, blops, ecm etc. these days. To me skirmish boosting is one fun way to go solo or in a small group against larger fleets. I remember a small group of hostiles playing with us in their boosted nano-setups. Ofc it was annyoing at the first glance but this brought a lot of fun on grid especially when we started to counter them the same way.

The main problem I see with links on-grid is that this will take away the boost from solo players or very small gangs while it will be another exclusive feature for bigger fleets only which still have the advantage by numbers, logistics and everything you can imagine to pimp a fleet to be awesome. They can field their booster easily on grid beeing repped up while a small gang trying to play with them and skirmish links will definitely lose their booster because it can't stay long at distance on grid or has to jump out when fighting at a gate.

We still have the issue that bigger roaming fleets just can be countered if you bring well skilled and equiped numbers or you need to stay docked and let them pass. With links it's possible to play against them on grid. And to me it makes more sense to boost the weaker ones instead of boosting the stronger setups only at the end. But it seems that CCP wants to see the bigger fleets and blob-fests what might be a problem because everyone who's playing EVE for years knows what kind of players and how many players you finally need in a corp to field a decent bigger gang anytime.

:Edit: [url=https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3458485#post3458485]
:words:

I think that's a reasonable idea which would work well with on-grid boosting, particularly with skirmish links. It would go some way to balancing the odds of a smaller fleet, keep boosters on grid where they should be, and still not disincentivise a large fleet from taking gang links.

Anyone agree?

I understand combat boosts being on grid, but why change mining bonuses?
*NOTE* I am not a miner I have before and hated it that said, if people are lazy bastards and don't want to work for a kill then just wow...

Lets also not forget that some miner made the very ship we all sit in (with certain exceptions to be fair)

CCP, can we have some sort of confirmation (or denial) that the eventual intention is to move warfare link bonuses to on-grid only? There's some ambiguity here.

...CCP can try and criminalize boosts all they want but as I have been saying since the beginning of time on this subject, the best players will win 99% of the time....

Wish that it was so. Assuming you count yourself among the best/good players, I dare you to try and kill a ship that is 30-40% smaller, has 30-40% more speed, has 30-40% more tank and applies tackle from 30-40% farther out.
That is what T3's has contributed to solo/small-gang since the alts matured .. it is quite simply not possible to compete without having links in todays Eve. You can try of course, but it is rather pointless.

You are right that proper blobs will generally just ignore links as the sheer damage of focused fire will kill **** regardless, but if CCP manages to solve both the application of bonuses issue (hassle to manually assign boosters as they drop) and the head-shot problem you are looking at a vastly improved medium and down theatre complete with a brand new tactical layer (ie. link killer squads).

It is perfectly alright if people retask their alts to logi/eWar as they have a hard limit (locked targets, slots) to how much they can affect the outcome of anything and defenses against the two classes have been (are being) improved a lot with tiericide: Neuting Armageddon's, Sentry revival, Sensor HACs, fast'n'small AFs etc.
In tomorrow's Eve you will need to protect special assets (links, eWar, logistics) a lot more than previously, which is a good thing as it adds weak spots to gang/fleet compositions and thus more complexity.

blah blah blah all hypothetical

at the end of the day you are still 35%+ better by the use of something that is not commited to the fight at all

Get used to the fact that OGB's are getting phased out

blah blah blah all hypothetical

at the end of the day you are still 35%+ better by the use of something that is not commited to the fight at all

Get used to the fact that OGB's are getting phased out

On grid boosting just means that boosting is going to only be availble to the blob.

....

The main problem I see with links on-grid is that this will take away the boost from solo players or very small gangs while it will be another exclusive feature for bigger fleets only which still have the advantage by numbers, logistics and everything you can imagine to pimp a fleet to be awesome. They can field their booster easily on grid beeing repped up while a small gang trying to play with them and skirmish links will definitely lose their booster because it can't stay long at distance on grid or has to jump out when fighting at a gate.

We still have the issue that bigger roaming fleets just can be countered if you bring well skilled and equiped numbers or you need to stay docked and let them pass. With links it's possible to play against them on grid. And to me it makes more sense to boost the weaker ones instead of boosting the stronger setups only at the end. But it seems that CCP wants to see the bigger fleets and blob-fests what might be a problem because everyone who's playing EVE for years knows what kind of players and how many players you finally need in a corp to field a decent bigger gang anytime.

I understand combat boosts being on grid, but why change mining bonuses?

Sad to see CCP trying to nerf small gang warfare so hard.

It would make sense to nerf boosts for however much larger a fleet got but damn. People have been complaining in the patch thread that massive blobs greatly benefit from "these boosts" even though we can all see it takes them 30 seconds to lock a target and a half a second to destroy the ship. There comes a point when boosts go from being effective to just being there in the fleet for looks.

As stated earlier in this thread it is rather sad that CCP is taking away all the worth a t3 booster once had. .....

CCP, can we have some sort of confirmation (or denial) that the eventual intention is to move warfare link bonuses to on-grid only? There's some ambiguity here.

CCP shouldn't have to phase out 12 million skill points

Because having your out of corp boosts on-grid for high-sec wars is going to be oh so risky...

Seriously, they haven't phased anything out, they're just adding some risk to it. You know, risk, that thing that gets brought up (quite rightly so) every time someone tries to make High Sec completely safe. OGBs are at almost no risk. There aren't any significant trade-offs involved, it's just "do you have them or don't you?".

From Fozzie's post (linked above) links being redundant should make Command Ships and T3s with a couple links extremely viable as part of a small fleet comp.

Who said I'm only talking about high sec wars? That makes most of your post irrelevant and off topic.

What if Im wanting to bust a gate camp in low and I need that extra speed boost to better cope with their tacklers. If I aggress and Fozzies changes go into effect, booster gets aggro timer(also on grid), then those sentry guns are gonna love my booster. 5,000 EHP isn't very much......

Risky enough to fly a loki booster:
12 mil skill points for 3 gang links
5000 EHP
can only perma run AB since gang link are so cap reliant
cant run gang links while cloaked
defensive sub is for boosts
due to command processors there is no power for guns
no drone bay
600+ mil ship
expensive clone for probing/sig radius

I'm sorry that in order for me to take on a 5 person gate camp I sometimes use a ship that costs more than their fleet and potentially has more skill points in leadership than they have trained individually.

This is not what Fozzie is talking about at all. You would not get PvP flagged or suspect flagged for activating gang links. What Fozzie's idea, which is not being implemented in 1.1, is that Links would trigger a 60 second weapons timer, preventing you from jumping through a gate or docking for 60 seconds.

This would not in any way trigger a combat or criminal flag.

Someone suggested that boosting someone with a combat flag should pass that along but Fozzie pointed out that this was unfeasible due to the load it would put on the server with even moderately sized fleets.

If you are jumping your boosts into a gate-camp I would be far more concerned with them being alpha'd off the field by said camp if you only put 5k EHP of tank on them.

Congrats, sometimes I actually risk a ship worth that much using a character with over 6 times that SP total!

You could also probably actually bring a second ship on-grid and take out the camp rather easily without any boosts at all.

+1

I'm glad this was cleared up. Still can't find the server load part but it's nice to see some logic there. Much appreciated

I don't know what you're proud about? I was simply stating that my booster indirectly helps me out while being harmless to the entire system. I'd rather just have me on the killmail....

Risky enough to fly a loki booster:
12 mil skill points for 3 gang links
5000 EHP
can only perma run AB since gang link are so cap reliant
cant run gang links while cloaked
defensive sub is for boosts
due to command processors there is no power for guns
no drone bay
600+ mil ship
expensive clone for probing/sig radius

I'm sorry that in order for me to take on a 5 person gate camp I sometimes use a ship that costs more than their fleet and potentially has more skill points in leadership than they have trained individually.

Sounds like a fitting and ship selection problem, to me. Maybe you should try something with some actual tank to do your boosting. I hear they make these things called Command Ships that can fit links and have a decent tank at the same time. They appear to be cheaper than your gimmick fit Loki, too.

The day they let Command ships warp through bubbles is the day I'll start using them. T3 Boosters are much more than boosters. Having probes aboard also helps me find other peoples boosters/pounces. Hard to replace a cloak.

Cloaky scout is best scout.