Maybe playing devils advocate, maybe serious discussion point, not 100% sure myself:


What about a deployable structure with a limited range, calculated based on the the ship using x module's location, not where the target is?


Example: Structure has 100k range. Attacker is 140k away from structure, defender is 90. Attacker could still benefit from links but defender could not.

Where this might be used? Gate camp defense, tower defense? An over-arching 'I block the whole system' module, no, don' t like it at all. But a limited module.... IDK.

Why not make a module/script dictors and/or Hics (or another Ship) that negates or decrease boosts instead of prevent targets from warping.

Like a Anti-Warefare-Link-BubbleGäó.

Why not make a module/script dictors and/or Hics (or another Ship) that negates or decrease boosts instead of prevent targets from warping.

Like a Anti-Warefare-Link-BubbleGäó.

escort destroyer use number 342...jamming platform..using a module that reduces effective warfare link range to be on grid. Easier than rewriting all the warfare link code too :D (and maybe I can get my tech II algos out of it...)

With DICs/HICs, it would probably be even less acceptable. I was going along the line of thinking "If it's warfare link, it should be command ships".

Any thing along the system line would become heavy abused in empire against many groups. Specs would need to be developed to only work against those that are hostile against you otherwise there's nothing keeping someone rolling their alt in to system and shutting mining boost or all boosters in an incursion system.

Any thing along the system line would become heavy abused in empire against many groups. Specs would need to be developed to only work against those that are hostile against you otherwise there's nothing keeping someone rolling their alt in to system and shutting mining boost or all boosters in an incursion system.

Currently, command ships seem to have no counters other than probing down and driving them off. So how about a module that neutralizes command links?

Command Link Jammer I

Prerequisites: Electronic Warfare V, Warfare Link Specialist V (maybe others?)

Fitting cost: 125 MW, 75 TF

Description: This module detects broadcasts from other command modules in the system, and broadcasts a phase-inverted signal that renders other warfare links unusable. May only be mounted on command ships. Only one module may be mounted and active.

This would provide a counter in which one command ship may neutralize all others in the system, but if two such modules are activated, ALL command links in the system are rendered unusable.

What does the community think about this?

Every single one of these suggestions leaves links completely and totally unusable...

Maybe playing devils advocate, maybe serious discussion point, not 100% sure myself:


What about a deployable structure with a limited range, calculated based on the the ship using x module's location, not where the target is?


Example: Structure has 100k range. Attacker is 140k away from structure, defender is 90. Attacker could still benefit from links but defender could not.

Where this might be used? Gate camp defense, tower defense? An over-arching 'I block the whole system' module, no, don' t like it at all. But a limited module.... IDK.

The original one would only leave them fully negated if two or more jammers were active in the system. It could be argued that you'd only use it to turn the tide if you were sure the enemy couldn't counter-jam your links, but on second thought, a grid-limited link jammer would be more appropriate.

Every single one of these suggestions leaves links completely and totally unusable...

you are hitting the issue that is, iirc, hindering ccps' attempts to get even off grid boosting off the server. They want links on grid. It's just its a complex problem that the calculation spam is bit much to handle. The calculation spam being constant updating of spatial relationship of ships to boost in relation to position of the link boat.

edit: this structure would have this same issue. Granted the problem gets easier as the structure won't move like a CS. BUt...its still a complex problem.

No. Just no. Links have been shat on enough already...

Every single one of these suggestions leaves links completely and totally unusable...

You're a very sensitive soul if you think links have been severely mistreated recently.



Op success. Eve doesn't really need terrible, pants-on-head ******** buff mechanics. Maybe CCP should try to come up with some non-**** ones.

It could also be said you must be a very sensitive soul if you feel links are so 'pants-on-head ****** buff mechanics.'

Links have been nerfed a fair bit recently.

It could also be said you must be a very sensitive soul if you feel links are so 'pants-on-head ****** buff mechanics.' They're certainly not. Links have been nerfed a fair bit recently. That is factual. They've been reduced in effectiveness. They've been forced into open space. And 'unprobable' isn't a thing anymore. Very hard to probe still is, but not unprobable. All these things have directly nerfed links. Several of these changes, while not thrilling from the perspective of a command ship pilot were, even if only in hindsight, necessary. Some of them not really. But links HAVE been nerfed a fair bit recently. That's part of why this idea in the form of a 'disrupt ALL the links' is horrid, but in a small, deliberate, controlled scale, has some interesting discussion points to it.

But there would always be a minimum of two in system. Always. Regardless of weather or not either side actually brought one.

And a grid limited one would also make links worthless. If you can't actually apply the bonuses to the ships in the fight, why bother bringing them?