Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Daemun Khanid
Saeculari
25
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 01:16:02 -
[91] - Quote
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:Daemun Khanid wrote:Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:Shaleb Heworo wrote:Zappity wrote:Yeah, OGB should at least give suspect flags in lowsec so you can more easily engage on a station or gate. And with ECCM don't you pretty much need a bonused scanning ship? Yes you do. I know because i tried. Tackle Helios. Youre welcome. Go ahead and tackle a nuetral booster on a gate using a helios, then post your loss mail from the turrets here so I can laugh at you. Like I said earlier, I dont think off grid boosting is the issue. As long as you are allowed to find and shoot the booster I dont see the problem. Its boosters exploiting mechanics (or lack there of) using lowsec station and gate defenses to protect them in FW zones. Boosting should count as aggression and grant suspect status. As for the guy who said "snipe them" eye roll. Bringing a fleet of bs's to kill a single booster to take boosts away from 1-2 frigates in an FW zone is just idiotic and not a viable response... Just like I said the first time. Please dont respond without activating at least 3 braincells. Why would you.. probe down.. someone.. whos sitting.. on.. a ... gate? I mean.. you know exactly where they are.. and if you are on the same grid as them.. they.. aren't.. off.. grid.. boosting... Your own advice..
Did you read the post? Or can you? Because you are as someone else put it, "oblivious." I sincerely don't believe you even grasp the basic concepts of the scenario's being discussed.
Daemun of Khanid
|
Remiel Pollard
Layman's Terms. Don't Tell Me The Odds
6109
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 01:22:27 -
[92] - Quote
Daemun Khanid wrote:Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:
Why would you.. probe down.. someone.. whos sitting.. on.. a ... gate? I mean.. you know exactly where they are.. and if you are on the same grid as them.. they.. aren't.. off.. grid.. boosting...
Your own advice..
Did you read the post? Or can you? Because you are as someone else put it, "oblivious." I sincerely don't believe you even grasp the basic concepts of the scenario's being discussed.
No, he gets it just fine. You clearly don't, as evidenced by the very existence of this thread.
GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'.
Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥
- Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
|
Paranoid Loyd
2851
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 01:23:48 -
[93] - Quote
Daemun Khanid wrote: Did you read the post? Or can you? Because you are as someone else put it, "oblivious." I sincerely don't believe you even grasp the basic concepts of the scenario's being discussed.
Did you? Let me simplify it for you:
Zappity wrote:And with ECCM don't you pretty much need a bonused scanning ship?
Shaleb Heworo wrote:Yes you do. I know because i tried.
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:Tackle Helios.
Youre welcome.
"Gankers are just other players, not supernatural monsters who will get you if you don't follow some arbitrary superstition. Haul responsibly and without irrational fear." Masao Kurata
|
Dani Maulerant
Valkyrie Professional Resources LOADED-DICE
3
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 02:18:59 -
[94] - Quote
Until it is reworked properly, they could add more risk and choice in using OGB. Activating warfare modules gains a weapons timer. Limits hugging gates and stations. After all, it is a function directly linked to offensive modules and combat activities.
Also, these links and all their processing for vessels in an entire system connected to it increases sig radius, making them easier to prob down.
|
Irya Boone
Never Surrender.
416
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 02:29:02 -
[95] - Quote
Need to take care of this CCP for january please , remove the Off grid in boosters , make links work like smartbombs ... so you will have to be at 10Km of a gate or station to use them ...and of course put them on killmails , and put logistics too
CCP it's time to remove Off Grid Boost and Put Them on Killmail too, add Logi on killmails
.... Open that damn door !!
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2356
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 02:37:18 -
[96] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Destiny, what do you think about adding links to killmails? I think that it's probably okay to add any form of active support to kill mails. That includes logistics and boosters. This is aside from the fact that I find the kill mail system flawed to begin with, and giving away too much intelligence from both the winners and the losers.
I also agree with the people who propose that boosters should inherit the timers of their recipients. However, there would be an issue here with regard to the criminal timer. Targeted assistance shuts down when someone goes criminal, but since boosting affects multiple people at the same time, that wouldn't work as a solution. Criminally-flagged people would need to become "boost-ineligible" somehow.
Shaleb Heworo wrote:I'm sorry but you post just shows a complete lack of undertanding of how solo pvp works. That actually accounts for many of the proponents of ogb. Would you consider that this is a topic you don't completely survey since your approach to pvp is just so different? Good try, but probably something around 80% of my entire active activities in EVE are solo pvp. I'm either doing wars, alone in a wormhole, or using EVE as a chatbox. I both use boosters, and face them commonly. As part of the mercenary work I do, I've both been hired to boost others and sniff out enemy boosters to organize ganks on them. So when I talk about this topic, I speak from a wealth of personal experience with it, unlike say, faction warfare or jump drives, which I stay silent on.
The fact of the matter is that on-grid boosting will disproportionately hurt smaller forces in uneven engagements. This isn't backed up by wishful thinking, but by pure math. Ships and fits in EVE have upper EHP thresholds (which are very low, for boosters, by the way). If incoming firepower exceeds a certain value, then you pop instantly without any recourse; there's no amount of logistics you can bring to save yourself from that. The net effect will be that any force that's capable of a certain amount of dps (let's say 50 ships) will have a disproportionate advantage over any force smaller in number.
That's not a good direction in which to take EVE's pvp.
If you're going to ask for a change in the boosting mechanic, at least do the game a favor and ask for it to be removed entirely instead of being made on-grid only. At least that way, the balance of power will be preserved.
Hal Morsh wrote:Jarod Garamonde wrote:Off-grid boosting should stay. Don't like it? Probe down the booster alt, and kill it. I thought a proper boost alt was unscannable even with perfect skills, the best implants and an appropriate ship fit all and only for scanning? Or has this changed? This has changed a while ago. Nothing in the game is unscannable anymore, although it can be very difficult to probe down. The thing about boosters though, especially T3s, is that adding scan resistance really cuts into their ability to boost well. Still, some further balance could be achieved here.
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
Daemun Khanid
Saeculari
25
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 02:48:50 -
[97] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Did you? Let me simplify it for you since your superior intellect can't seem to follow along: Zappity wrote:And with ECCM don't you pretty much need a bonused scanning ship? Shaleb Heworo wrote:Yes you do. I know because i tried. Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:Tackle Helios.
Youre welcome. Daemun Khanid wrote: Go ahead and tackle a nuetral booster on a gate using a helios, then post your loss mail from the turrets here so I can laugh at you.
Now who's post does not grasp the basic concepts of the scenarios being discussed?
You're apparently still missing the point. If youre tackling a booster in FW it's going to be on a gate or station. Unless there are changes to push them out from under sentry guns you dont need a scanning ship. They'll be sitting right there in plain sight laughing at you.
Daemun of Khanid
|
Damen Apol
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
78
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 03:03:27 -
[98] - Quote
Daemun Khanid wrote:
You're apparently still missing the point. If youre tackling a booster in FW it's going to be on a gate or station. Unless there are changes to push them out from under sentry guns you dont need a scanning ship. They'll be sitting right there in plain sight laughing at you.
I feel bad for you so I'll clue you in.
They were talking about scanning down OGBs.
Ask yourself.
Why would you scan down a ship?
You do this because you have no way of warping to it.
Ask yourself
If the OGB is on a gate, is there a way to warp to it?
Yes, you warp to the gate.
So if they're talking about scanning down a ship when you have no way of warping to it, and you can warp to ships on gates, do you think they were talking about ships on gates? |
Daemun Khanid
Saeculari
25
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 03:15:17 -
[99] - Quote
Damen Apol wrote:Daemun Khanid wrote:
You're apparently still missing the point. If youre tackling a booster in FW it's going to be on a gate or station. Unless there are changes to push them out from under sentry guns you dont need a scanning ship. They'll be sitting right there in plain sight laughing at you.
I feel bad for you so I'll clue you in. They were talking about scanning down OGBs. Ask yourself. Why would you scan down a ship? You do this because you have no way of warping to it. Ask yourself If the OGB is on a gate, is there a way to warp to it? Yes, you warp to the gate. So if they're talking about scanning down a ship when you have no way of warping to it, and you can warp to ships on gates, do you think they were talking about ships on gates?
And you continue to miss the point. There's more being discussed than scanning down ogb's and calls to completely get rid of them.
Daemun of Khanid
|
McChicken Combo HalfMayo
The Happy Meal
92
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 03:55:09 -
[100] - Quote
I don't expect this opinion to be popular, but I don't think boosting should ever improve the ability of a solo pilot. Off-grid, on-grid, or otherwise. I'd remove most of the boosts entirely in their current form.
All remote modules would receive a boost, on grid and off grid. Other boosts introduced on specific factors. On-grid in fleet with at least one full squad, smaller ships can receive boosts to speed, sig rad and point range. Larger ships can receive boosts to tank, sensor strength, and scan res.
~ Bookmarks in overview
~ Fleet improvements
|
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
15750
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 03:55:18 -
[101] - Quote
Not sure why anyone is debating this. The issue is already settled as far as CCP is concerned and only legacy code issues prevent a fix (obviously these issues are substantial since we will not see a fix anytime soon).
Fewell wrote:Do the lowering of effective bonuses you're proposing here put links in a place where you feel comfortable leaving them off grid, or is work continuing to move them on grid? CCP Fozzie wrote:Nothing would make me comfortable with optimal gameplay for some characters during a battle being for them to sit at a safespot.
There is nothing interesting about sitting in a corner and having a major impact on a battle somewhere else (metagaming notwithstanding). All sorts of smarmy arguments can be found regarding how easy it is to find and shoot the link, but that's not really the point.
Mr Epeen wrote:I'm fine with OGB and I'll tell you why. To make a good booster takes a long time. It's not like banging out a gank alt on a trial. It's more than six months of focused min/max training to do one simple thing. To add on grid capabilities to that would be another number of months. So I feel there is enough of a penalty involved in training one that the balance is maintained. And as mentioned above, they can be probed down and easily blapped. Mr Epeen
Let me see you say that to a multiplexing incursion runner.
No?
Then this argument holds no water here, either.
Friendship is the best ship.
Sabriz for CSM go go go
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
26665
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 04:06:35 -
[102] - Quote
sib you scary.
boosters get headshotted but considering the scale of the benefit to fleet, it is more than fair if they are at risk.
I engage in both off grid afk boosting in highsec, and tanky damnation on grid boosting elsewhere. bc RP i suppose
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Twitter |-ámk.III | Imgur
| Evening Games Club: Casino concept redefined |
|
Mina Sebiestar
Mactabilis Simplex Cursus
774
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 04:17:30 -
[103] - Quote
Run 2 boosting chars for a long time before t3 nerf it is brutally effective tool and IMO it should be on grid or removed
If old code is a serious issue than some sort of neutralizing ship is in order that prevent system wide boosting when present in same.
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
1613
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 04:22:11 -
[104] - Quote
Even a weapons timer would help a lot in lowsec. It is pathetic to see so many T3s hugging stations and gates. Where is the risk when they can just jump or dock?
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2356
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 04:38:02 -
[105] - Quote
Timer inheritance is very much acceptable and makes sense, as long as the criminal flag discrepancy I mentioned earlier is addressed. Timers, kill mails, and sensor strength rebalancing delivered as a package should constitute an acceptable solution to this perceived problem, while keeping the overall balance of power intact.
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
15751
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 04:43:10 -
[106] - Quote
Re:Zappity and Des, maybe relevant, but a lot can change in a person's opinion in a year.
CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey guys, I want to make it clear that the weapons timer for links is not for Odyssey 1.1. It's a tool we have in our back pocket for if it ends up being needed. I won't rule out using it depending on how things go in the future, but we're also not dead set on enabling it.
Rain6637 wrote:sib you scary.
Goon of my heart.
Friendship is the best ship.
Sabriz for CSM go go go
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
1614
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 04:48:58 -
[107] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey guys, I want to make it clear that the weapons timer for links is not for Odyssey 1.1. It's a tool we have in our back pocket for if it ends up being needed. I won't rule out using it depending on how things go in the future, but we're also not dead set on enabling it.
Thanks, I'd missed that.
Fozzie, please turn it on! If on grid boosting has to wait for the dogma rewrite then please do this in the meantime. Honestly, in lowsec FW regions they are like barnacles stuck to the side of stations. Ridiculous. Get them out into space where they can be probed down and killed.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2356
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 04:55:13 -
[108] - Quote
If we can agree that the nerf would stop with the timer and potentially kill-mails and sensor strength rebalancing (though the latter would only need a very small adjustment, since scanning is much stronger now), then we should just go through with it and put the matter to rest. IF. Keyword "if."
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
15753
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 05:01:42 -
[109] - Quote
Nah, they should just be brought on grid for a proper murdering.
Friendship is the best ship.
Sabriz for CSM go go go
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2358
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 05:10:04 -
[110] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote: Nah, they should just be brought on grid for a proper murdering.
Then the smaller parties in uneven battles will be disproportionately worse-off than they are today. Talking about small-to-medium gang warfare here, and not "solo" stuff.
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
15753
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 05:23:04 -
[111] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote: Then the smaller parties in uneven battles will be disproportionately worse-off than they are today. Talking about small-to-medium gang warfare here, and not "solo" stuff.
I'm obligated to include this quote.
A wise fellow wrote:Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of GÇÿnew playersGÇÖ, that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Is the use of off-grid boosters more prevalent in small gangs vs. large ones? I'm asking because statistically I don't really know.
Friendship is the best ship.
Sabriz for CSM go go go
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2358
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 05:33:44 -
[112] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote:Destiny Corrupted wrote: Then the smaller parties in uneven battles will be disproportionately worse-off than they are today. Talking about small-to-medium gang warfare here, and not "solo" stuff.
I'm obligated to include this quote. A wise fellow wrote:Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of GÇÿnew playersGÇÖ, that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. Is the use of off-grid boosters more prevalent in small gangs vs. large ones? I'm asking because statistically I don't really know. The use of boosters is a constant right now. It's the status quo.
If boosting is brought on grid, then what's going to happen is that the larger force in a fight will always have the advantage, because they'll be able to kill the booster easily.
Let's say there's a fleet of 25 players, and a fleet of 50 players. Furthermore, let's arbitrarily say that a booster increases fleet efficiency by 50%, and that the threshold for destroying a booster without any recourse (that is to say, it gets popped instantly no matter the fit and/or amount of logistics present) is 50 players.
Here are some scenarios for off-grid boosting:
25 vs 25 = 25*1.5 vs 25*1.5 (boosters off-grid and intact unless parties show initiative off the field of battle) 50 vs 50 = 50*1.5 vs 50*1.5 (boosters off-grid and intact unless parties show initiative off the field of battle) 25 vs 50 = 25*1.5 vs 50*1.5 (boosters off-grid and intact unless parties show initiative off the field of battle)
The balance of power remains the same regardless of fleet size
Now for on-grid boosting:
25 vs 25 = 25*1.5 vs 25*1.5 (neither fleet can destroy each other's boosters better than the other can) 50 vs 50 = 50*1.0 vs 50*1.0 (both fleets destroy each other's with equal efficiency) 25 vs 50 != 25*1.0 vs 50*1.5 (the first fleet's booster is destroyed, and the balance of power is destroyed)
The larger party now has the advantage as long as it exceeds the threshold level for outgoing damage.
Hopefully the numbers get my point across.
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
15753
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 05:36:37 -
[113] - Quote
Good post, Des. Thanks.
Friendship is the best ship.
Sabriz for CSM go go go
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2359
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 05:39:51 -
[114] - Quote
NP. This has been my argument throughout the years for why boosting absolutely can't be brought on-grid. It should either remain off-grid, or be removed entirely. Making it grid-only will create a massive power imbalance that will only serve to encourage people to only field forces in excess of the threshold required for instantly "de-boosting" enemy fleets. This will wreck smaller-scale pvp.
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
McChicken Combo HalfMayo
The Happy Meal
92
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 06:22:19 -
[115] - Quote
Keeping boosts off-grid, the affects of the boosts can scale up based on pilots in fleet that are uncloaked in system, while keeping the point of entry low enough for full boosts that any ragtag squad could achieve it.
Booster + 1 = 11.1% current boost level Booster + 2 = 22.2% Booster + 9+ = 100% current boost level
~ Bookmarks in overview
~ Fleet improvements
|
Jarod Garamonde
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
2336
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 06:22:50 -
[116] - Quote
Hal Morsh wrote:Jarod Garamonde wrote:
Off-grid boosting should stay. Don't like it? Probe down the booster alt, and kill it.
I thought a proper boost alt was unscannable even with perfect skills, the best implants and an appropriate ship fit all and only for scanning? Or has this changed?
That's funny. Because, when we can be bothered to, SMERG does it every time we try.
That moment when you realize the crazy lady with all the cats was right...
[#savethelance]
|
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
2360
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 06:28:58 -
[117] - Quote
McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote:Keeping boosts off-grid, the affects of the boosts can scale up based on pilots in fleet that are uncloaked in system, while keeping the point of entry low enough for full boosts that any ragtag squad could achieve it.
Booster + 1 = 11.1% current boost level Booster + 2 = 22.2% Booster + 9+ = 100%
There are of course the obvious problems that arise from this but they might be outweighed by the greater balance achieved in 1 on 1 engagements. I'd say that this would lead to a negative net gain, because group engagements far exceed 1vs1 engagements in overall volume. If anything, this would force players' hands to try to avoid having less than 10 people in the fleet at any given time.
I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:
https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted
|
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
278
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 07:02:17 -
[118] - Quote
Sibyyl wrote:Not sure why anyone is debating this. The issue is already settled as far as CCP is concerned. CCP is always right and their goals and direction are not to be questioned.
Alt of [redacted on advice from a reputable internet spaceships lawyer]
|
Sibyyl
Gallente Federation
15753
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 07:14:41 -
[119] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:Sibyyl wrote:Not sure why anyone is debating this. The issue is already settled as far as CCP is concerned. CCP is always right and their goals and direction are not to be questioned.
Conveniently you didn't respond to the part of my post where I provided both my and Fozzie's reasons. I'm not sure what I think about Des's argument. I'll have to think about it some more.
And you should know me better than to try and pin a "CCP is always right" stance on me. Feel free to browse the very thread that has resulted in you posting as Rifter, if you doubt me.
Friendship is the best ship.
Sabriz for CSM go go go
|
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
278
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 07:16:57 -
[120] - Quote
I don't even remember what thread that was.
Alt of [redacted on advice from a reputable internet spaceships lawyer]
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |