EVE Search - Can't believe Off Grid Boosting is still around. Srsly?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Can't believe Off Grid Boosting is still around. Srsly?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2015.03.08 20:29:13 - [1] - Quote I recently bought this toon and returned to EVE after a break due to rl obligations and I was shocked to see that ogb was not only still around but that it has spread like a desease and infested most of lowsec and nullsec even. Before anyone calls me a whiner let me say this: I have much love for EVE as a game and even though i don't have much time to play it I will probably keep my accounts subbed until tranquility shuts down.I'm not a "pro" and I don't care for kb stats but i do care for good fights which way too often simply get ruined by off grid boosted undercover super ships! Wasn't this supposed to be dealt with a long time ago!? Why do you even bother balancing hulls if you're allowing a condor being turned into a garmur from off grid without any notable risk?! The arguments for getting rid of this terrible mechanic are well known so I won't enumerate them again but seriously: CCP. get your stuff together! You guys know what a turn off ogb is for half of the pvp community, you know how it caters to a dumped down, tedious, slow and risk-averse playsyle that is literally poison to pvp as a whole! If the dogma rewrite still takes time give us something in the meantime! This bullshit mechanic has been around for way too long and not everybody is enough of an eve fanboy to endure your disregard in that respect.CCP, do something!
Agondray Avenger Mercenaries VOID Intergalactic Forces 221	Posted - 2015.03.08 20:51:14 - [2] - Quote I cant believe we can work a rover on mars with out being on grid! "Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2015.03.08 21:02:22 - [3] - Quote Agondray wrote: I cant believe we can work a rover on mars with out being on grid! FYI ongrid boost isn't going to solve the problems of people picking fights in empire, only makes it to where you have a target ongrid in low, null, and wormhole. then theres the changes to the incursion community which would be down 1 more useful ship in a site who said anything about "picking fights in empire"? Ogb gives one half of pvpers a massive practically risk free advantage over the other half while dumpening down tactical depth in the process. It's the definition of a bad mechanic that messes with all the careful balancing and complexity that ccp has created. empire, lowsec, nullsec: doesn't matter, it's still a terrible mechanic!
Mr Epeen It's All About Me 7868	Posted - 2015.03.08 21:12:00 - [4] - Quote Both fleets in an engagement can use OGB. I find it difficult to see the 'risk free advantage' here. Mr Epeen There are 86,400 seconds in a day. You just saved one of them by typing 'u' instead of 'you'.-á Congratulations, dumbass!
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1824	Posted - 2015.03.08 21:13:51 - [5] - Quote Yes, what OP said. OGB is bad and needs to die. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Godfrey Silvarna Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light 369	Posted - 2015.03.08 21:17:18 - [6] - Quote Interaction without seeing and feeling other involved parties is bad game design. It is not engaging game play.
Abrazzar Vardaugas Family 6147	Posted - 2015.03.08 21:21:20 - [7] - Quote Found the new niche for supers: Off grid boosting. They alone will keep that power, while every other command link capable ship with have to stick on grid. (Rorquals will be turned into POS modules.) Sovereignty and Population New Mining Mechanics
Unsuccessful At Everything The Troll Bridge 20271	Posted - 2015.03.08 21:21:40 - [8] - Quote I cant believe its this thread again! My thoughts on 'I cant believe its not butter' have changed a tad though. I just don't know if I can eat a product that doesn't believe in itself. If they really wanted to fix that, they really need to rename it 'you wont believe this isn't butter'. At least then, its on you. Right as it is, the damn tub is having a crisis, and not one person wants to do anything about it.. and its title is calling out for help. Have some self confidence you buttery spread! People buy you all the time, despite the fact that you aren't butter. Don't put thoughts in my head before I even buy you. Would you do that with any other product? I know I sure as hell wouldn't buy 'I cant believe this aint cheese!'. What the **?!?! Im staying the hell away from that. I may even rearrange the shelves to move that stuff away from the cheeses.. just so the real cheese doesn't get some kind of complex. Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings? Vote Sabriz Adoudel** for CSM 10!
Potamus Jenkins eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred 140	Posted - 2015.03.08 21:24:07 - [9] - Quote sometimes its easier to suggest things be fixed than you know actually fixing them.
Kry Meariver Kry Meariver Corporation 19	Posted - 2015.03.08 21:39:33 - [10] - Quote Off grid boosting needs to die. If a boosting ship is not on grid with a boosted ship, there should be no bonus. My guess is it is difficult to code the change.

Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 1	Posted - 2015.03.08 21:41:12 - [11] - Quote Mr Epeen wrote: Both fleets in an engagement can use OGB. I find it difficult to see the 'risk free advantage' here. Mr Epeen You're missing the point. Not everybody is willing or able to run a booster. Forcing people to run a second account to compete in small scale or solo pvp is a huge turn off. Furthermore the sheer existance of ogb penalizes players who like fast paced, spontanious and mobile pvp. It caters to risk-averse stationary pvp. For inherent logical reasons that decreases the total number of fights happening which equals to: bad for EVE pvp which equals to: Bad mechanic being bad for EVE. It's really as simple as that. The question remains: Why doesn't CCP take action?
d0cTeR9 Astro Technologies SpaceMonkey's Alliance 76	Posted - 2015.03.08 21:48:00 - [12] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: I recently bought this toon and returned to EVE after a break due to rl obligations and I was shocked to see that ogb was not only still around but that it has spread like a desease and infested most of lowsec and nullsec even. Before anyone calls me a whiner let me say this: I have much love for EVE as a game and even though i don't have much time to play it I will probably keep my accounts subbed until tranquility shuts down.I'm not a "pro" and I don't care for kb stats but i do care for good fights which way too often simply get ruined by off grid boosted undercover super ships! Wasn't this supposed to be dealt with a long time ago!? Why do you even bother balancing hulls if you're allowing a condor being turned into a garmur from off grid without any notable risk?! The arguments for getting rid of this terrible mechanic are well known so I won't enumerate them again but seriously: CCP, get your stuff together! You guys know what a turn off ogb is for half of the pvp community, you know how it caters to a dumped down, tedious, slow and risk-averse playsyle that is literally poison to pvp as a whole! If the dogma rewrite still takes time give us something in the meantime! This bullshit mechanic has been around for way too long and not everybody is enough of an eve fanboy to endure your disregard in that respect.CCP, do something! Well apparently assigning fighters off-grid is a big NO NO, but off-grid boosting is fine...
Shiloh Templeton Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 244	Posted - 2015.03.08 21:50:17 - [13] - Quote Perhaps CCP should also get rid of blobs, hot drops, falcons, warping in alts, etc. P.S. Almost forgot AFK cloaking.
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34550	Posted - 2015.03.08 21:52:34 - [14] - Quote Potamus Jenkins wrote: sometimes its easier to suggest things be fixed than you know actually fixing them. Totally agree. Sometimes it's also possible to suggest things be fixed when they really don't need to be anyway. For me, it's just the have-nots complaining about what they don't have when they could. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Lictas Alice The Men Who Sold Worlds 14	Posted - 2015.03.08 21:54:59 - [15] - Quote If the null sec alliances started crying about links , it would get changed. But its only really an issue too solo pilots /small gangs. Eve is suppose to be risk=reward, i'm not sure how much risk there is sitting a links alt on station/ at a pos so your 400m faction frig can kill t1 frigs.
Alice Saki Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 125725	Posted - 2015.03.08 21:59:14 - [16] - Quote Small Gang NEED Offgb to be effective against larger Targets. FREEZE! Drop the LIKES AND WALK AWAY! - All I want from Xmas is YOUUUUUUUUUUUUU
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1828	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:01:06 - [17] - Quote CCP has already said that they want to bring links on grid. But I'm not confident that this will be any time soon. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
2Sonas1Cup 28	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:01:20 - [18] - Quote On grid 350km away
Alice Saki Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 125725	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:02:16 - [19] - Quote Zappity wrote: CCP has already said that they want to bring links on grid. But I'm not confident that this will be any time soon. They did Nerf them, Which is why you'll find OnGB with Armour fleets. Shield nano Fleets are still more likely to use OffGB FREEZE! Drop the LIKES AND WALK AWAY! - All I want from Xmas is YOUUUUUUUUUUUUU
Lictas Alice The Men Who Sold Worlds 14	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:09:08 - [20] - Quote Zappity wrote: CCP has already said that they want to bring links on grid. But I'm not confident that this will be any time soon. They said that years ago , If i remember correctly it would be hard too implant and not really worth the time ( a summary off ccp) We don't really need on grid links though , there other ways too 'balance' links. A few suggestions: Links cant be activated within 150km of station/ gate/pos/structure( too stop sitting links at pos's) Links/rr go on any KM of any ship they help and get suspect links causes suspect after activating links you cant move for x time and cant re-activate for x time I'm not saying all of those things should be implemented or even that they are good ideas . I thought of them in 1min . Pretty sure if CCP wanted too , they could make them more balanced

Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 3	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:11:18 - [21] - Quote Alice Saki wrote: Small Gang NEED Offgb to be effective against larger Targets. Small gangs shouldn't be effective against much larger gangs when brawling! They should be forced to use tactical wit instead of bluntly boosting their stats from off grid to make it look as if they accomplish something heroic. Besides: The larger the gang the higher the probability that they have a dedicated booster aswell. The whole ogb is necessary for small vs larger gang argument is null. More often than not ogb's are used by risk averse players to gain an advantage on top of their superior numbers.
Arla Sarain 337	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:11:34 - [22] - Quote Shiloh Templeton wrote: Perhaps CCP should also get rid of blobs, hot drops, falcons, warping in alts, etc. P.S. Almost forgot AFK cloaking. Perhaps they should just get rid of OGB.
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34550	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:11:53 - [23] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Furthermore the sheer existance of ogb penalizes players who like fast paced, spontanious and mobile pvp. It caters to risk-averse stationary pvp. For inherent logical reasons that decreases the total number of fights happening which equals to: bad for EVE pvp which equals to: Bad mechanic being bad for EVE. It's really as simple as that. The question remains: Why doesn't CCP take action? If I can offer a counter argument to that, my experience is almost the opposite of what you are saying here. Before I trained a links character I was reluctant to take fights outnumbered. But seeing how extensive the use of links is in lowsec, I trained a character up (pw. q1w2e3r4). She is far from slow and static, though her Loki doesn't warp as fast as a frigate or a T1 cruiser when I roam. She is used to scout as well as provide links, so gives me eyes in 2 systems at once, providing more knowledge of what is happening around. But mostly, having the links has allowed me to take more fights than I otherwise would because I will happily engage well outnumbered. 17:1 (17:2 including the links) is the largest fight I have taken on (I died of course, but took several down beforehand). Links can move fast and promote anything but risk aversion. Fighting outnumbered creates good fights for everyone and has had flow on effects into other areas. When I began FCing, having taken on a lot of fights outnumbered on my own (as a player), I already had a relatively good skillset in selecting targets and identifying which to take down first. That has bought better fights to my corpmates too when we are in fleet, whether we are running links or not. Would I really care if links were changed? Not really. I'm already training my links alt up to be on-grid at some point in the future, but links aren't a magic pill. Good piloting can still counter the benefit that someone else gains through links. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1828	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:19:40 - [24] - Quote Interesting comments above. Even just giving links a weapons timer would go a long way. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Chopper Rollins Lantean Empire 1055	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:20:51 - [25] - Quote I have scanned down and killed links strategic cruisers. Also blapped away at ones sitting at edge of pos shield or on undock in lowsec. Helped throw a squad of bombs at one pos-lurking links bc. Best of all, some poor drinker fat-finger-warped his links loki to an ice belt and got it destroyed by four bait fit procurers. There is risk to off-grid boosters. You must supply it. Goggles. Making me look good. Making you look good.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12048	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:22:35 - [26] - Quote Alice Saki wrote: Small Gang NEED Offgb to be effective against larger Targets. No, you mean kiters need off grid boosts to be effective. As to the OP, off grid boosting should be eliminated. For almost everything else that can contribute a measurable mechanical benefit to a fight, said asset must be on grid to do so. You cannot off grid logi, you cannot off grid ewar, and you cannot off grid tackle. You should not be able to off grid boost. Period. That said, CCP has stated several times that it not unwillingness to do so which holds them back, it is inability to do so. Meaning that they can't actually figure out how to implement it without causing excessive server load. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Lictas Alice The Men Who Sold Worlds 15	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:23:00 - [27] - Quote Scipio Artelius wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: Furthermore the sheer existance of ogb penalizes players who like fast paced, spontanious and mobile pvp. It caters to risk-averse stationary pvp. For inherent logical reasons that decreases the total number of fights happening which equals to: bad for EVE pvp which equals to: Bad mechanic being bad for EVE. It's really as simple as that. The question remains: Why doesn't CCP take action? If I can offer a counter argument to that, my experience is almost the opposite of what you are saying here. Before I trained a links character I was reluctant to take fights outnumbered. But seeing how extensive the use of links is in lowsec, I trained a character up (pw. q1w2e3r4). She is far from slow and static, though her Loki doesn't warp as fast as a frigate or a T1 cruiser when I roam. She is used to scout as well as provide links, so gives me eyes in 2 systems at once, providing more knowledge of what is happening around. But mostly, having the links has allowed me to take more fights than I otherwise would because I will happily engage well outnumbered. 17:1 (17:2 including the links) is the largest fight I have taken on (I died of course, but took several down beforehand). Links can move fast and promote anything but risk aversion. Fighting outnumbered creates good fights for everyone and has had flow on effects into other areas. When I began FCing, having taken on a lot of fights outnumbered on my own (as a player), I already had a relatively good skillset in selecting targets and identifying which to take down first. That has bought better fights to my corpmates too when we are in fleet, whether we are running links or not. Would I really care if links were changed? Not really. I'm already training my links alt up to be on-grid at some point in the future, but links aren't a magic pill. Good piloting can still counter the benefit that someone else gains through links. If it was only solo players vs larger gangs using links , i wouldn't mind. But in my experience , its usually people in faction ships/full set of implants/ with backup/ with links at a 100% safe place( generally FW zones). Or for example in HS , Sit a links boat in a NPC corp get a pretty safe advantage with no risk. It gives people another advantage that can't really be countered , which is why it should be changed. Logi? Focus them . Ecm? Use eccm Neuts? Cap boosters/nos Links??
Alice Saki Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 125737	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:24:22 - [28] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Alice Saki wrote: Small Gang NEED Offgb to be effective against larger Targets. Small gangs shouldn't be effective against much larger gangs when brawling! They should be forced to use tactical wit instead of bluntly boosting their stats from off grid to make it look as if they accomplish something heroic. Besides: The larger the gang the higher the probability that they have a dedicated booster aswell. The whole ogb is necessary for small vs larger gang argument is null. More often than not ogb's are used by risk averse players to gain an advantage on top of their superior numbers. Rephrase. Small SHIELD NANO GANGS NEED OFFGB to be effective againt larger targets. The Alliance I just left, We used to fly to Goons home system Stir the Hornets nest with our 10 to 30 man gang and Get Swarmed by up too 900 goonies xD Without the Skirmish links providing Off Grid Boosting we'd all die in seconds. FREEZE! Drop the LIKES AND WALK AWAY! - All I want from Xmas is YOUUUUUUUUUUUUU
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34550	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:29:16 - [29] - Quote Lictas Alice wrote: But in my experience , its usually people in faction ships/full set of implants/ with backup/ with links at a 100% safe place( generally FW zones). Where is your experience from that this is it? There's a lot more use of links than faction ships and a set of implants for someone without links can also counter the links, the difference there being that links scale across the squad/wing/fleet where implants are individual. Particularly in lowsec, there is no greater risk to a pod than to a links ship (unless Santo or a copycat is around, but that can be avoided easily too). Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Carrie-Anne Moss Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 20	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:29:43 - [30] - Quote Alice Saki wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: Alice Saki wrote: Small Gang NEED Offgb to be effective against larger Targets. Small gangs shouldn't be effective against much larger gangs when brawling! They should be forced to use tactical wit instead of bluntly boosting their stats from off grid to make it look as if they accomplish something heroic. Besides: The larger the gang the higher the probability that they have a dedicated booster aswell. The whole ogb is necessary for small vs larger gang argument is null. More often than not ogb's are used by risk averse players to gain an advantage on top of their superior numbers. Rephrase. Small SHIELD NANO GANGS NEED OFFGB to be effective againt larger targets. The Alliance I just left, We used to fly to Goons home system Stir the Hornets nest with our 10 to 30 man gang and Get Swarmed by up too 900 goonies xD Without the Skirmish links providing Off Grid Boosting we'd all die in seconds. Ummm dont you think 10-30 ships SHOULD DIE IN SECONDS to 900 ships?? Lol The fact that 10-30 can last more than seconds against such odds is proof it is unlabanced. And again, if you or anyone is agruing and saying OGB is good/should stay. You r wrong. Ccp said u are wrong. They just cant figure out how to code it, they want yo change it though just cant

Lictas Alice The Men Who Sold Worlds 15	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:31:37 - [31] - Quote Alice Saki wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: Alice Saki wrote: Small Gang NEED Offgb to be effective against larger Targets. Small gangs shouldn't be effective against much larger gangs when brawling! They should be forced to use tactical wit instead of bluntly boosting their stats from off grid to make it look as if they accomplish something heroic. Besides: The larger the gang the higher the probability that they have a dedicated booster aswell. The whole ogb is necessary for small vs larger gang argument is null. More often than not ogb's are used by risk averse players to gain an advantage on top of their superior numbers. Rephrase. Small SHIELD NANO GANGS NEED OFFGB to be effective againt larger targets. The Alliance I just left, We used to fly to Goons home system Stir the Hornets nest with our 10 to 30 man gang and Get Swarmed by up too 900 goonies xD Without the Skirmish links providing Off Grid Boosting we'd all die in seconds. Without links i can't engage outnumbered because its actually the off grid , off kill mail links that gives me a big enough advantage too take ridiculous fights and do well. This is why links need to be changed....
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34550	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:34:35 - [32] - Quote Carrie-Anne Moss wrote: Ummm dont you think 10-30 ships SHOULD DIE IN SECONDS to 900 ships?? Lol The fact that 10-30 can last more than seconds against such odds is proof it is unlabanced. Haha, no. Look at how many small gangs come to catch for good fights and end up against larger Brave fleets, or third-partying into fights you guys are having already. Piloting skill means a lot more than links in those situations. Go and watch a couple of the Chessur videos on YouTube for good examples of that exact situation. We used to do the same in Barlequet before you took sov. 200 in system and we would snipe with kiting rails fits and everyone had a great time (without links too). Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 3	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:35:58 - [33] - Quote Scipio Artelius wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: Furthermore the sheer existance of ogb penalizes players who like fast paced, spontanious and mobile pvp. It caters to risk-averse stationary pvp. For inherent logical reasons that decreases the total number of fights happening which equals to: bad for EVE pvp which equals to: Bad mechanic being bad for EVE. It's really as simple as that. The question remains: Why doesn't CCP take action? If I can offer a counter argument to that, my experience is almost the opposite of what you are saying here. Before I trained a links character I was reluctant to take fights outnumbered. But seeing how extensive the use of links is in lowsec, I trained a character up (pw. q1w2e3r4). She is far from slow and static, though her Loki doesn't warp as fast as a frigate or a T1 cruiser when I roam. She is used to scout as well as provide links, so gives me eyes in 2 systems at once, providing more knowledge of what is happening around. But mostly, having the links has allowed me to take more fights than I otherwise would because I will happily engage well outnumbered. 17:1 (17:2 including the links) is the largest fight I have taken on (I died of course, but took several down beforehand). Links can move fast and promote anything but risk aversion. Fighting outnumbered creates good fights for everyone and has had flow on effects into other areas. When I began FCing, having taken on a lot of fights outnumbered on my own (as a player), I already had a relatively good skillset in selecting targets and identifying which to take down first. That has bought better fights to my corpmates too when we are in fleet, whether we are running links or not. Would I really care if links were changed? Not really. I'm already training my links alt up to be on-grid at some point in the future, but links aren't a magic pill. Good piloting can still counter the benefit that someone else gains through links. What about the players who don't run links? Many of them will be hesitant to engage at all since they will always be afraid that the incursus in that plex might be able to tank their gang due to that legion floating in space somewhere but not showing up on these embarrassing km's. Why do you even need links anyway? I fight 1vsmany most of the time and i have a lot of fun doing it. There are other ways than bluntly boosting your stats. kiting for instance. Don't you realize that this whole ogb thing is a huge turn off for casuals, newer players or generally anybody who doesn't want to run a second account? Shouldn't success in pvp be determined by tactical means and by what you actually throw in the ring (aka risking it)rather than by a boosting t3 or command ship which doesn't interact during the fight whatsoever? You sound freasonable so i'm really hoping that you understand that it's not about not having a link alt, I could easily afford one tbh but that wouldn't change the fact that for reasons stated above ogb's are a terrible mechanic.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2064	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:36:34 - [34] - Quote Lictas Alice wrote: If it was only solo players vs larger gangs using links , i wouldn't mind. But in my experience , its usually people in faction ships/full set of implants/ with backup/ with links at a 100% safe place( generally FW zones). Or for example in HS , Sit a links boat in a NPC corp get a pretty safe advantage with no risk. It gives people another advantage that can't really be countered , which is why it should be changed. Logi? Focus them . Ecm? Use eccm Neuts? Cap boosters/nos Links?? Neutral links being on grid in highsec wouldn't affect them in any way whatsoever, they'd still not be legal targets. If you wanted to change how links are employed in highsec you'd have to mess with crimewatch. If you really want to open up that particular can of worms again that's fine by me, I mean they did such a great job last time.
Lictas Alice The Men Who Sold Worlds 16	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:42:03 - [35] - Quote Scipio Artelius wrote: Lictas Alice wrote: But in my experience , its usually people in faction ships/full set of implants/ with backup/ with links at a 100% safe place( generally FW zones). Where is your experience from that this is it? There's a lot more use of links than faction ships and a set of implants for someone without links can also counter the links, the difference there being that links scale across the squad/wing/fleet where implants are individual. Particularly in lowsec, there is no greater risk to a pod than to a links ship (unless Santo or a copycat is around, but that can be avoided easily too). uh , pretty much any faction warfare zones?From being in faction warfare on this acc/alts for years. I can understand why people do this. It's simple. They wanted the biggest advantage , so there killed board looks impressive. I recently went into null , I was in a AB fit incursus. I landed in a bubble 120kms away from a Sivipul / orthus , The orthus burned at me going 5k/ms . Somehow i managed too scram him w/o links , w/o a t2 point. This really shouldn't of happened. I killed his 500m faction fit kite boat in a ab inc..When i checked his killboard, it was a hell of alot more impressive then mine something like 2k kills 100 losses, but his piloting skills were on par with a 2month old char. My point is , People want the biggest advantage , Numbers , rr , logi , implants ect. Which is fine , But links cant really be countered. If there was actually some risk when using link boats/ they were on killmails , it would be a much nicer place.
Alice Saki Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 125740	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:43:53 - [36] - Quote Carrie-Anne Moss wrote: Alice Saki wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: Alice Saki wrote: Small Gang NEED Offgb to be effective against larger Targets. Small gangs shouldn't be effective against much larger gangs when brawling! They should be forced to use tactical wit instead of bluntly boosting their stats from off grid to make it look as if they accomplish something heroic. Besides: The larger the gang the higher the probability that they have a dedicated booster aswell. The whole ogb is necessary for small vs larger gang argument is null. More often than not ogb's are used by risk averse players to gain an advantage on top of their superior numbers. Rephrase. Small SHIELD NANO GANGS NEED OFFGB to be effective againt larger targets. The Alliance I just left, We used to fly to Goons home system Stir the Hornets nest with our 10 to 30 man gang and Get Swarmed by up too 900 goonies xD Without the Skirmish links providing Off Grid Boosting we'd all die in seconds. Ummm dont you think 10-30 ships SHOULD DIE IN SECONDS to 900 ships?? Lol The fact that 10-30 can last more than seconds against such odds is proof it is unlabanced. And again, if you or anyone is agruing and saying OGB is good/should stay. You r wrong. Ccp said u are wrong. They just cant figure out how to code it, they want yo change it though just cant Only if you get caught, thats the Magic of OGB ;) FREEZE! Drop the LIKES AND WALK AWAY! - All I want from Xmas is YOUUUUUUUUUUUUU
Lictas Alice The Men Who Sold Worlds 16	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:44:33 - [37] - Quote Vimsy Vortis wrote: Lictas Alice wrote: If it was only solo players vs larger gangs using links , i wouldn't mind. But in my experience , its usually people in faction ships/full set of implants/ with backup/ with links at a 100% safe place( generally FW zones). Or for example in HS , Sit a links boat in a NPC corp get a pretty safe advantage with no risk. It gives people another advantage that can't really be countered , which is why it should be changed. Logi? Focus them . Ecm? Use eccm Neuts? Cap boosters/nos Links?? Neutral links being on grid in highsec wouldn't affect them in any way whatsoever, they'd still not be legal targets. If you wanted to change how links are employed in highsec you'd have to mess with crimewatch. If you really want to open up that particular can of worms again that's fine by me, I mean they did such a great job last time. I know , i kinda hinted at that a few posts earlier. If they can't implement on grid links , i am pretty sure theres other things they could do. Links on kilmails would be great , all those 'solo' pilots that need links to win would be exposed and probbably stop using them
Blusterby Diggenploof FOODIE Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 3	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:44:39 - [38] - Quote Why not make it this way. Off grid boosters while boosting can't use gates or warp due to command links on and boom fixed.
Alice Saki Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 125740	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:46:34 - [39] - Quote Blusterby Diggenploof FOODIE wrote: Why not make it this way. Off grid boosters while boosting can't use gates or warp due to command links on and boom fixed. This I could live with xD FREEZE! Drop the LIKES AND WALK AWAY! - All I want from Xmas is YOUUUUUUUUUUUUU
Tipa Riot Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 154	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:57:40 - [40] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Alice Saki wrote: Small Gang NEED Offgb to be effective against larger Targets. No, you mean kiters need off grid boosts to be effective. As to the OP, off grid boosting should be eliminated. For almost everything else that can contribute a measurable mechanical benefit to a fight, said asset must be on grid to do so. You cannot off grid logi, you cannot off grid ewar, and you cannot off grid tackle. You should not be able to off grid boost. Period. That said, CCP has stated several times that it not unwillingness to do so which holds them back, it is inability to do so. Meaning that they can't actually figure out how to implement it without causing excessive server load. This. I may add that any mechanic which forces players to multibox a 2nd account is bad and has to be changed. In fleet we have logi pilots, we have ewar pilots but we don't have ogb pilots for obvious reasons. I'm my own NPC alt.

Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34550	Posted - 2015.03.08 22:59:28 - [41] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: What about the players who don't run links? Many of them will be hesitant to engage at all since they will always be afraid that the incursus in that plex might be able to tank their gang due to that legion floating in space somewhere but not showing up on these embarrassing km's. Why do you even need links anyway? I fight 1vsmany most of the time and i have a lot of fun doing it. There are other ways than bluntly boosting your stats. kiting for instance. Don't you realize that this whole ogb thing is a huge turn off for casuals, newer players or generally anybody who doesn't want to run a second account? Shouldn't success in pvp be determined by tactical means and by what you actually throw in the ring (aka risking it)rather than by a boosting t3 or command ship which doesn't interact during the fight whatsoever? You sound freasonable so i'm really hoping that you understand that it's not about not having a link alt, I could easily afford one tbh but that wouldn't change the fact that for reasons stated above ogb's are a terrible mechanic. If they don't run links, that's their choice. If they are hesitant because of that, then they will find some other excuse to be hesitant in the absence of links. Risk aversion is not determined by the presence of links in the game, it's an individual thing that exists outside the game mechanics. Why do I need links? I don't particularly. It's a game mechanic that is available, so I choose to use it. There is nothing wrong in doing so and it's nothing about boosting my stats. I don't give two hoots about stats, just having good fights. In relation to this particular issue, links allow me to engage a much wider group of targets, both having and bringing good fights as a result. So in my personal experience, they aren't a negative in that respect. In relation to casuals. Quite frankily, if they are going to whinge because they are a casual, then that is just another excuse used. "I'm just casual. It's not fair" is a pretty weak argument and if someone doesn't want to run a second account, then links are no different to someone else choosing to run a second account for logistics, or as to multibox DPS. 2 v 1 in those cases is no different, but complaining about not wanting to do something is the typical request for CCP to step in and help because they can't accept that it is their own self imposed limitation. Success in pvp is never a concrete thing (with or without links) and no, why should tactical means be the only thing that affect outcome? Operational and Strategic decisions are equally important. But overall I don't disagree with the argument about OGB. It could be removed from the game and the only affect would be to make the landscape of pvp a little less interesting (more uniform and less varied in that respect). The only lament I would have from that is the time and effort that has gone into training a character to use the mechanics to their best advantage. It's not a trivial commitment. Those who make that choice gain benefit out of that choice, but if you look at the skillset of that character I linked, she is pretty much links focused at the moment and has been constantly trained since she was started two and a half years ago. Links characters are not an instant win button. But I'd move on and find some other use for her it if happens. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
RZ Tivianne Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 16	Posted - 2015.03.08 23:04:02 - [42] - Quote If you had bothered to do any real research on the subject you would know that the reason off-grid boosters are still a thing is because the math needed to make on-grid boosting will not be necessary until Brain in a Box is done, which still has the ETA of ~soon~. For more information, just search brain in a box on the devblogs and you'll see plenty of info, ditto with the forums, and that will explain the technical side and why it's important/necessary to the change.
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34550	Posted - 2015.03.08 23:07:22 - [43] - Quote RZ Tivianne wrote: If you had bothered to do any real research on the subject you would know that the reason off-grid boosters are still a thing is because the math needed to make on-grid boosting will not be necessary until Brain in a Box is done, which still has the ETA of ~soon~. For more information, just search brain in a box on the devblogs and you'll see plenty of info, ditto with the forums, and that will explain the technical side and why it's important/necessary to the change. In the absence of brain-in-a-box, I guess it would always be possible to remove links from the game temporarily. I don't see that happening, but temporary solutions should be possible until the preferred approach is available. Passive boosts from leadsrhip skills would still exist, but it should be possible to temporarily remove the effect of links modules. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 3	Posted - 2015.03.08 23:15:16 - [44] - Quote Scipio Artelius wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: What about the players who don't run links? Many of them will be hesitant to engage at all since they will always be afraid that the incursus in that plex might be able to tank their gang due to that legion floating in space somewhere but not showing up on these embarrassing km's. Why do you even need links anyway? I fight 1vsmany most of the time and i have a lot of fun doing it. There are other ways than bluntly boosting your stats. kiting for instance. Don't you realize that this whole ogb thing is a huge turn off for casuals, newer players or generally anybody who doesn't want to run a second account? Shouldn't success in pvp be determined by tactical means and by what you actually throw in the ring (aka risking it)rather than by a boosting t3 or command ship which doesn't interact during the fight whatsoever? You sound freasonable so i'm really hoping that you understand that it's not about not having a link alt, I could easily afford one tbh but that wouldn't change the fact that for reasons stated above ogb's are a terrible mechanic. If they don't run links, that's their choice. If they are hesitant because of that, then they will find some other excuse to be hesitant in the absence of links. Risk aversion is not determined by the presence of links in the game, it's an individual thing that exists outside the game mechanics. Why do I need links? I don't particularly. It's a game mechanic that is available, so I choose to use it. There is nothing wrong in doing so and it's nothing about boosting my stats. I don't give two hoots about stats, just having good fights. In relation to this particular issue, links allow me to engage a much wider group of targets, both having and bringing good fights as a result. So in my personal experience, they aren't a negative in that respect. In relation to casuals. Quite frankily, if they are going to whinge because they are a casual, then that is just another excuse used. "I'm just casual. It's not fair" is a pretty weak argument and if someone doesn't want to run a second account, then links are no different to someone else choosing to run a second account for logistics, or as to multibox DPS. 2 v 1 in those cases is no different, but complaining about not wanting to do something is the typical request for CCP to step in and help because they can't accept that it is their own self imposed limitation. Success in pvp is never a concrete thing (with or without links) and no, why should tactical means be the only thing that affect outcome? Operational and Strategic decisions are equally important. But overall I don't disagree with the argument about OGB. It could be removed from the game and the only affect would be to make the landscape of pvp a little less interesting (more uniform and less varied in that respect). The only lament I would have from that is the time and effort that has gone into training a character to use the mechanics to their best advantage. It's not a trivial commitment. Those who make that choice gain benefit out of that choice, but if you look at the skillset of that character I linked, she is pretty much links focused at the moment and has been constantly trained since she was started two and a half years ago. Links characters are not an instant win button. To sum things up: You think that time and money invested in a game should factor into pvp even more than it's already the case. In contrast to that I and many of the opponents of ogb believe that tactical means aka actual skill should be more decisive and that in terms of accessability this would lead to a healthier game in general. In that regard we have essentially different notions of what kind of a game eve should be. Your statement that removing ogb would lead to a more uniform landscape is just plain wrong though. Leveling the field creates competition which puts incentive on creative tactical solutions. Thus New Eden would most certainly become a more interesting place in terms of pvp.
Sniper Smith Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 316	Posted - 2015.03.08 23:21:20 - [45] - Quote Off Grid Boosting exists for one big reason: On Grid Boosting is NOT viable. Not unless you are in Carriers or Titans. Or a Slep roam. Beyond that booting ships are survivable for any length of time at all. It's a broken mechanic with broken ships and modules that hamper their use in small fleets, and in large ones make Off Grid, or using Cap's that aren't as easy to just blow off the grid. CCP did make changes so there's no more of the unscanable Booster ships, and kicked them out of the POS's (except for Rorq/Orca, they can still boost in a POS till they get their rebalance).. Which was a good change imho. They are now able to be killed, you just need to get them, or keep forcing them to warp, either way removes the boosts. Now for me, I think Off Grid boosting should remain, but with one change. I'd like difference bonuses for off grid vs on grid. Say a 50% Bonus for being On Grid (Or a 50% Reduction for being off grid).. Also, I'd like an end to those Command Processors. Having them take up your mids kills shield booster ships. It makes no sense that you can fit near a full rack of links on a Damnation, AND Tank, but try that on a Vulture you get just the links and nada else. Just make it so you can fit as many as there are slots on Command Ships, and adjust their fitting stats to even it out. T3's.. hell just make it 1link + link for each level of that Subsystems skill. There's your 6 high slots. Do the same for Carriers and Titans. Leave BC's alone as 1 link only.. Now as for the comment about can't warp/jump/etc.. Well Boosting should give an aggression timer.. so no gates/docking while links are on+1min. While in warp, links go off anyway, so as long as you keep scanning em down, they aren't boosting anything, or are tackled. It takes about as much SP to make a scanning toon that can scan down that booster in seconds, as it does to have the perfect booster.. so I don't see the issue myself.. sooner or later you'll catch em, or they won't notice the probes, and you'll have your kill. In the mean time constant warping will keep them from boosting. Another idea, increase the cycle time of links, but make them take a massive amount of cap at the beginning.. it would average out to the same now, but if you keep activating them as you warp away, land, etc, then you'll be cap dry in short order and unable to warp, or unable to boost. Or blowing though a lot of charges, which again, finite amount, can't keep it up forever..
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34551	Posted - 2015.03.08 23:34:55 - [46] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: To sum things up: You think that time and money invested in a game should factor into pvp even more than it's already the case. In contrast to that I and many of the opponents of ogb believe that tactical means aka actual skill should be more decisive and that in terms of accessability this would lead to a healthier game in general. No, I think that is a misinterpretation of what I intended. Probably my bad writing more than anything. No pvp in this game is based purely on the skill of individual pilots. The choice of ship and fit, the focus of skillpoints (those small percentages can make a difference at times), the location of the engagement and how the ships are arranged on grid (a kiting ship warping into a FW Plex with a brawling ship inside is likely to be at a disadvantage initially irrespective of on-grid skill, but skill to pull range before being tackled helps), implants, drug boosters, resists, etc. - are all variables that mean no engagement comes down purely to skill. But in some respects many of those things are also skill based, but at a different level of decision making. Tactical decisions on grid have a huge effect on the outcome of a fight, but they aren't the only ones and no fight is straight up skill based. Quote: In that regard we have essentially different notions of what kind of a game eve should be. Your statement that removing ogb would lead to a more uniform landscape is imo just plain wrong though. There is a lot of variety in choice we make for pvp. Removing any of them makes the game more uniform. Levelling the field would also involve removing drugs, implants, different fleet setups, etc. There is no practical way to level the field. That's what makes pvp so much of a challenge. Overcoming and/or making best use of the odds is why pvp is so much fun, at least in my view. Quote: Leveling the field creates competition which puts incentive on creative tactical solutions. Thus New Eden would most certainly become a more interesting place in terms of pvp. This I'll agree we differ. Levelling the field in my view creates less interest. The most level a field could be would be equal skillpoints, same ships, same fits and same choices in every other aspect. That would become very boring quickly in my opinion. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Serene Repose 2352	Posted - 2015.03.08 23:49:44 - [47] - Quote People who do it, ridicule. Rational people go, huh? You get an extra row of pawns? To the response, "Crybaby!" Treason never prospers. What is the reason? Why, if it prospers, none dare call it "treason."
Asura Vajrarupa Sanguis Inceptum 36	Posted - 2015.03.09 00:02:34 - [48] - Quote It's a terrible mechanic but produces hilarious killmails and salty tears when you catch an ogb and kill it. Ignorance is the cause of suffering.
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 3	Posted - 2015.03.09 00:08:31 - [49] - Quote Scipio Artelius wrote: No, I think that is a misinterpretation of what I intended. Probably my bad writing more than anything. No pvp in this game is based purely on the skill of individual pilots. The choice of ship and fit, the focus of skillpoints (those small percentages can make a difference at times), the location of the engagement and how the ships are arranged on grid (a kiting ship warping into a FW Plex with a brawling ship inside is likely to be at a disadvantage initially irrespective of on-grid skill, but skill to pull range before being tackled helps), implants, drug boosters, resists, etc. - are all variables that mean no engagement comes down purely to skill. But in some respects many of those things are also skill based, but at a different level of decision making. Tactical decisions on grid have a huge effect on the outcome of a fight, but they aren't the only ones and no fight is straight up skill based. Agreed, but the point was that you want static factors like sp or a booster alt to have a bigger impact wheras I and others would prefer spontanious tactical decisions to be more decisive. The strategic aspect of eve has a huge impact as it is -that's just fine and nobody wants to turn eve pvp into a game of chess I believe. The problem with boosts is that they provide a massive advantage which especially in solo pvp can't be countered and which involves no risk or interaction even. I'm sure you understand how that makes ogb's unique compared to any other static factor or strategic decision. Removing links would leave more room for dynamic factors like smart manual piloting and deception and I just think that would make a better game as I'm sure you'll understand. But tbh as i said i don't really wanted to discuss why ogb is a bad mechanic. That has basically been settled
Carrie-Anne Moss Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 20	Posted - 2015.03.09 00:39:32 - [50] - Quote Scipio Artelius wrote: Carrie-Anne Moss wrote: Ummm dont you think 10-30 ships SHOULD DIE IN SECONDS to 900 ships?? Lol The fact that 10-30 can last more than seconds against such odds is proof it is unlabanced. Haha, no. Look at how many small gangs come to catch for good fights and end up against larger Brave fleets, or third-partying into fights you guys are having already. Piloting skill means a lot more than links in those situations. Go and watch a couple of the Chessur videos on YouTube for good examples of that exact situation. We used to do the same in Barlequet before you took sov. 200 in system and we would snipe with kiting rails fits and everyone had a great time (without links too). Chessur is leet, yet flies billion isk ships with drugs and OFFGRID BOOSTERS lol thats the whole point dude. Wtf?

Sean Parisi Fugutive Task Force A T O N E M E N T 641	Posted - 2015.03.09 00:49:13 - [51] - Quote Just my personal opinion as a Semi-Link *****. -> Drastically lower boosts for Offgrid boosts. IE: Instead of a 30% bonus, change it to about 5%. -> 30% bonus for On grid Boosting -> Add more boosting ships for each ship size. Battleship, Destroyer, Frigate, Cruiser (Not T3's) -> Nerf fitting requirement on links to increase combat viability of on grid ships. What does this mean? Offgrid boosting is still capable - providing a small advantage, but not an exponential one. Encourage people to bring their links on field while being useful. Make links more accessible as well.
Hal Morsh Aliastra Gallente Federation 267	Posted - 2015.03.09 01:03:28 - [52] - Quote I hate off grid boosts. Thing is there is a way to defeat them if you have a group who can follow well with a half intelligent FC. I was in this group who got wardeced. Thing here is they didn't often leave system because thye flew about in boosted garmurs. You get caught off a station or gate and you weren't escaping. Even with low DPS from them you'd still be permastuck. What we did is we had someone occupy the garmurs, got someone to scan the links and pilot in front of it, when we jumped some destroyers in system and ganked it. They decided to tell us it was "backup links" we killed but the garmurs were reported to slow down. It wasn't long before they got replacement links onfield even though we podded their links. The war ended shortly after, but as an example. Occupy the link receiver then start scanning. Till CCP fixes it. CCP - Outpost code is scary.
Unezka Turigahl Det Som Engang Var 626	Posted - 2015.03.09 01:20:35 - [53] - Quote I think they should get rid of boosts entirely. No off grid, no on grid, no fleet bonus. Turn the command ships into something else. Refund SP for fleet command skills and allow anyone to form a fleet of any size.
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34552	Posted - 2015.03.09 01:31:18 - [54] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Agreed, but the point was that you want static factors like sp or a booster alt to have a bigger impact wheras I and others would prefer spontanious tactical decisions to be more decisive. No, that's not what I want at all. I became involved in what has been a reasonable discussion up to now because a view was put that links only make people risk averse and pvp slow and static. I offered a counter-view to that based on my experience. But presuming to know what I want when I've never said that at all just risks this devolving into personal assumptions and attacks, which leads to pointless discussion. So I'll bow out, because that's not productive. But what you claim about me is not true. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2066	Posted - 2015.03.09 03:08:50 - [55] - Quote Lictas Alice wrote: I know , i kinda hinted at that a few posts earlier. If they can't implement on grid links , i am pretty sure theres other things they could do. Links on kilmails would be great , all those 'solo' pilots that need links to win would be exposed and probbably stop using them Again this wouldn't have any affect on their use in highsec. When you need links in highsec it's usually because you intend to engage a numerically superior but otherwise inferior opponent and that extra advantage. The numbers of people involved in your kills is irrelevant and losing the element of surprise after their first use is much the same as it is with neutral logistics except with links they are never actually vulnerable. The logical solution is to give neutral characters that are providing fleet bonuses to characters who are suspect flagged, involved in limited engagements, or are engaging war targets suspect flags. It sounds like a great idea right? I guarantee it wouldn't work out how people want it to, much like suspect flagging of neutral logistics had a number of funny side effects that routinely screw over the uninformed.
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34577	Posted - 2015.03.09 03:10:05 - [56] - Quote Carrie-Anne Moss wrote: Chessur is leet, yet flies billion isk ships with drugs and OFFGRID BOOSTERS lol thats the whole point dude. Wtf? Haha, yeah. Not always with OGB. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Boozbaz Brutor Clan 12	Posted - 2015.03.09 03:23:54 - [57] - Quote Kry Meariver wrote: Off grid boosting needs to die. If a boosting ship is not on grid with a boosted ship, there should be no bonus. My guess is it is difficult to code the change. I'm thinking the same thing.
Fade Azura Azura Industries 165	Posted - 2015.03.09 06:38:13 - [58] - Quote Off grid boosting has already been dealt with .... the nerf to unprobeable t3's and command ships unable to give links within a POS. everything anyone can do with links can be countered if they make a hard to probe down t3 it can still be probed down and killed if they are boosting next to a station or a pos shields .. some tornado's warping in can alpha shot it or force it off and last but not least you can always bring the same links and use same tactics as they are if you cant do either of the above if you are unable or unwilling to take the above steps to match your enemy .. then honestly your not on the same level and don't deserve to win that fight. but anyways this has been discussed to death many times and nothing is going to change anytime soon so stop complaining and go blow some stuff up ... its a lot more constructive then whining on the forums about things that are easily countered or matched.
Amyclas Amatin SUNDERING Goonswarm Federation 629	Posted - 2015.03.09 07:27:51 - [59] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: I recently bought this toon and returned to EVE after a break due to rl obligations and I was shocked to see that ogb was not only still around but that it has spread like a desease and infested most of lowsec and nullsec even. Before anyone calls me a whiner let me say this: I have much love for EVE as a game and even though i don't have much time to play it I will probably keep my accounts subbed until tranquility shuts down.I'm not a "pro" and I don't care for kb stats but i do care for good fights which way too often simply get ruined by off grid boosted undercover super ships! Wasn't this supposed to be dealt with a long time ago!? Why do you even bother balancing hulls if you're allowing a condor being turned into a garmur from off grid without any notable risk?! The arguments for getting rid of this terrible mechanic are well known so I won't enumerate them again but seriously: CCP, get your stuff together! You guys know what a turn off ogb is for half of the pvp community, you know how it caters to a dumped down, tedious, slow and risk-averse playsyle that is literally poison to pvp as a whole! If the dogma rewrite still takes time give us something in the meantime! This bullshit mechanic has been around for way too long and not everybody is enough of an eve fanboy to endure your disregard in that respect.CCP, do something! I too am beside myself with outrage and disbelief over a broken game mechanic. As a customer I feel entitled to demand change. ~~But deep down inside, I know I deserve everything that CCP does. CCP giveth and CCP taketh away.~~ For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/ Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"
Demerius Xenocratus Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation 123	Posted - 2015.03.09 08:10:12 - [60] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Alice Saki wrote: Small Gang NEED Offgb to be effective against larger Targets. No, you mean kiters need off grid boosts to be effective. As to the OP, off grid boosting should be eliminated. For almost everything else that can contribute a measurable mechanical benefit to a fight, said asset must be on grid to do so. You cannot off grid logi, you cannot off grid ewar, and you cannot off grid tackle. You should not be able to off grid boost. Period. That said, CCP has stated several times that it not unwillingness to do so which holds them back, it is inability to do so. Meaning that they can't actually figure out how to implement it without causing excessive server load. I'm speechless.

Demerius Xenocratus Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation 123	Posted - 2015.03.09 08:14:57 - [61] - Quote Fade Azura wrote: Off grid boosting has already been dealt with .... the nerf to unprobeable t3's and command ships unable to give links within a POS. everything anyone can do with links can be countered if they make a hard to probe down t3 it can still be probed down and killed if they are boosting next to a station or a pos shields .. some tornado's warping in can alpha shot it or force it off and last but not least you can always bring the same links and use same tactics as they are if you cant do either of the above if you are unable or unwilling to take the above steps to match your enemy .. then honestly your not on the same level and don't deserve to win that fight. but anyways this has been discussed to death many times and nothing is going to change anytime soon so stop complaining and go blow some stuff up ... its a lot more constructive then whining on the forums about things that are easily countered or matched. So you're saying I should just man up and spend $100 on PLEX to buy a booster alt. Can I just spend $500 for a frigate sized CONCORD deathray? Is this an EA game? And nobody cares about links in gangs it's FW 1v1 action that gets broken by OGB.
Demerius Xenocratus Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation 123	Posted - 2015.03.09 08:17:20 - [62] - Quote Alice Saki wrote: Carrie-Anne Moss wrote: Alice Saki wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: Alice Saki wrote: Small Gang NEED Offgb to be effective against larger Targets. Small gangs shouldn't be effective against much larger gangs when brawling! They should be forced to use tactical wit instead of bluntly boosting their stats from off grid to make it look as if they accomplish something heroic. Besides: The larger the gang the higher the probability that they have a dedicated booster aswell. The whole ogb is necessary for small vs larger gang argument is null. More often than not ogb's are used by risk averse players to gain an advantage on top of their superior numbers. Rephrase. Small SHIELD NANO GANGS NEED OFFGB to be effective againt larger targets. The Alliance I just left, We used to fly to Goons home system Stir the Hornets nest with our 10 to 30 man gang and Get Swarmed by up too 900 goonies xD Without the Skirmish links providing Off Grid Boosting we'd all die in seconds. Ummm dont you think 10-30 ships SHOULD DIE IN SECONDS to 900 ships?? Lol The fact that 10-30 can last more than seconds against such odds is proof it is unlabanced. And again, if you or anyone is agruing and saying OGB is good/should stay. You r wrong. Ccp said u are wrong. They just cant figure out how to code it, they want yo change it though just cant Only if you get caught, thats the Magic of OGB ;) You're telling me a 900 man nullsec blob can't log a virtue prober alt and kill or force you to turn off links with 2 minutes?
Madd Adda 32	Posted - 2015.03.09 08:23:36 - [63] - Quote Wouldn't nerfing OGB hinder mining foreman links too? I don't see the reasoning for getting rid of all OGB in that case. If it were only warfare links to get nerfed then i can get behind that, just don't ruin it for links that don't have any impact on pvp. Carebear extraordinaire
Godfrey Silvarna Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light 370	Posted - 2015.03.09 08:26:13 - [64] - Quote Madd Adda wrote: Wouldn't nerfing OGB hinder mining foreman links too? I don't see the reasoning for getting rid of all OGB in that case. If it were only warfare links to get nerfed then i can get behind that, just don't ruin it for links that don't have any impact on pvp. There is no need for off-grid mining links either. Interaction, where all involved players can at least see each other is good for the game.
Madd Adda 32	Posted - 2015.03.09 08:37:24 - [65] - Quote Godfrey Silvarna wrote: Madd Adda wrote: Wouldn't nerfing OGB hinder mining foreman links too? I don't see the reasoning for getting rid of all OGB in that case. If it were only warfare links to get nerfed then i can get behind that, just don't ruin it for links that don't have any impact on pvp. There is no need for off-grid mining links either. Interaction, where all involved players can at least see each other is good for the game. how is seeing one another "interaction"? I often don't mine in the same asteroid belt as a boosting orca /barges just so I don't interfere with what they're mining. Why penalize all of us for those that are abusing the warfare links? Carebear extraordinaire
jurgen b Papal Zouaves 9	Posted - 2015.03.09 12:14:47 - [66] - Quote Madd Adda wrote: Wouldn't nerfing OGB hinder mining foreman links too? I don't see the reasoning for getting rid of all OGB in that case. If it were only warfare links to get nerfed then i can get behind that, just don't ruin it for links that don't have any impact on pvp. but but.....it's magic and it belongs in a game named WoW where raids have buffs to pop more magic and wizzard stuff and it is bad for the idd for the 1V1 promoting in novice plexes idd. it's all magic eve boosts from a station from orca's is pure magic eve on grid it's magic boosts that is
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 312	Posted - 2015.03.09 13:26:56 - [67] - Quote Lictas Alice wrote: Vimsy Vortis wrote: Lictas Alice wrote: If it was only solo players vs larger gangs using links , i wouldn't mind. But in my experience , its usually people in faction ships/full set of implants/ with backup/ with links at a 100% safe place( generally FW zones). Or for example in HS , Sit a links boat in a NPC corp get a pretty safe advantage with no risk. It gives people another advantage that can't really be countered , which is why it should be changed. Logi? Focus them . Ecm? Use eccm Neuts? Cap boosters/nos Links?? Neutral links being on grid in highsec wouldn't affect them in any way whatsoever, they'd still not be legal targets. If you wanted to change how links are employed in highsec you'd have to mess with crimewatch. If you really want to open up that particular can of worms again that's fine by me, I mean they did such a great job last time. I know , i kinda hinted at that a few posts earlier. If they can't implement on grid links , i am pretty sure theres other things they could do. Links on kilmails would be great , all those 'solo' pilots that need links to win would be exposed and probbably stop using them No they wouldn't because none of them are claiming they are not using links. They are quite happy to even tell you what links they like to run and how they run them. People use links because they can and so can the enemy so you should expect them to be using them to. We extensively use links because again it would be stupid not too. Just as it stupid not to fit deadspace modules if you have the isk, and to carry drugs. And even use that expensive faction hull. People are not afraid to get a leg up, and be open about it. Almost everyone i know with links things that it should be "on grid" only (but they should probably fix some grid foo stuff as well). But while it is not, there is no good reason not to use them. CCP have said that in principal only on grid links is what they want, but the code base and programming is too difficult. However that didn't stop them from keeping mining links active inside a POS force field. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Alice Saki Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 125767	Posted - 2015.03.09 14:29:57 - [68] - Quote Imma just put it down to people who can afford to run Link alts and those who can't :) FREEZE! Drop the LIKES AND WALK AWAY! - All I want from Xmas is YOUUUUUUUUUUUUU
Janeway84 Def Squadron Pride Before Fall 147	Posted - 2015.03.09 14:34:41 - [69] - Quote Maybe CCP can make people with 10-1 kb get worse effects from links while people with crap kb stats gets 200% improvement from links?
Sir Constantin 27	Posted - 2015.03.09 14:39:34 - [70] - Quote CCP don't care and most of the players have already links so you can't reason with them because they like having a green killboard. They are saying that learning implants make you not pvp, well, for me is the off-grid boosting. They could at least tweak the stats to give like 3-5%. I mean, you train for months for extra 3-5% or you need to buy expensive implants but hey, let's train a alt for a month or two and give 30-50% boost. #altsonline #paytowin

Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 312	Posted - 2015.03.09 15:17:19 - [71] - Quote Dude we don't do hashtags anymore. Well unless your on twitter or currently 16 and think it is something new. And if you think its pay to win, then I guess you don't like deadspace mods, of faction hulls, or people that get their **** together and have drugs on hand? Oh my you must hate people with friends that can always out number you. Lets be honest you just don't like it when other people kill you. No matter how much you derped. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Carmen Electra Shiptoasters 60404	Posted - 2015.03.09 15:25:09 - [72] - Quote Demerius Xenocratus wrote: So you're saying I should just man up and spend $100 on PLEX to buy a booster alt. If you found a booster alt for $100 worth of ISK, you should jump on that stat. Bacon makes us stronger
Lloyd Roses 889	Posted - 2015.03.09 15:32:17 - [73] - Quote Sir Constantin wrote: CCP don't care and most of the players have already links so you can't reason with them because they like having a green killboard. They are saying that learning implants make you not pvp, well, for me is the off-grid boosting. They could at least tweak the stats to give like 3-5%. I mean, you train for months for extra 3-5% or you need to buy expensive implants but hey, let's train a alt for a month or two and give 30-50% boost. #altsonline #paytowin Would you prefer if I put my boostalt into a falcon instead? Or rather want an odd curse, or should I just get a scimitar? It's called force multiplier for a reason. Also, boosts range from 18-30% mostly. Get your numbers straight before you complain, or try sitting on both sides. I GÖÑ Sleipnir
Lloyd Roses 889	Posted - 2015.03.09 15:34:31 - [74] - Quote Demerius Xenocratus wrote: You're telling me a 900 man nullsec blob can't log a virtue prober alt and kill or force you to turn off links with 2 minutes? A pimped helios for 70mil with a 20mil implant has the required scanstrength already. You don't need virtues for that since 2014. I GÖÑ Sleipnir
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 7	Posted - 2015.03.09 15:44:25 - [75] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: Sir Constantin wrote: CCP don't care and most of the players have already links so you can't reason with them because they like having a green killboard. They are saying that learning implants make you not pvp, well, for me is the off-grid boosting. They could at least tweak the stats to give like 3-5%. I mean, you train for months for extra 3-5% or you need to buy expensive implants but hey, let's train a alt for a month or two and give 30-50% boost. #altsonline #paytowin Would you prefer if I put my boostalt into a falcon instead? Or rather want an odd curse, or should I just get a scimitar? It's called force multiplier for a reason. Also, boosts range from 18-30% mostly. Get your numbers straight before you complain, or try sitting on both sides. To answer your question: Most players who refrain from using an ogb would prefer that. Logis, recons and ecm can be dealt with. Ogb is inherently different since there is almost no risk involved and when in doubt there is no way to be sure if a ship is boosted or not. It's the perfect tool for risk averse pilots who want fun and a "leet kb" at the expense of others. Ultimately that drives non link users away from eve which in the long run is bad for link users aswell. It's a bad mechanic which is bad for the game. Stop defending ogb's already the issue has been settled! The question remains: What will CCP give us before brain in a box is ready? After years of waiting people are fed up and they deserve a little more than "soon"!
Lictas Alice The Men Who Sold Worlds 17	Posted - 2015.03.09 15:59:18 - [76] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: Lictas Alice wrote: Vimsy Vortis wrote: Lictas Alice wrote: If it was only solo players vs larger gangs using links , i wouldn't mind. But in my experience , its usually people in faction ships/full set of implants/ with backup/ with links at a 100% safe place( generally FW zones). Or for example in HS , Sit a links boat in a NPC corp get a pretty safe advantage with no risk. It gives people another advantage that can't really be countered , which is why it should be changed. Logi? Focus them . Ecm? Use eccm Neuts? Cap boosters/nos Links?? Neutral links being on grid in highsec wouldn't affect them in any way whatsoever, they'd still not be legal targets. If you wanted to change how links are employed in highsec you'd have to mess with crimewatch. If you really want to open up that particular can of worms again that's fine by me, I mean they did such a great job last time. I know , i kinda hinted at that a few posts earlier. If they can't implement on grid links , i am pretty sure theres other things they could do. Links on kilmails would be great , all those 'solo' pilots that need links to win would be exposed and probbably stop using them No they wouldn't because none of them are claiming they are not using links. They are quite happy to even tell you what links they like to run and how they run them. People use links because they can and so can the enemy so you should expect them to be using them to. We extensively use links because again it would be stupid not too. Just as it stupid not to fit deadspace modules if you have the isk, and to carry drugs. And even use that expensive faction hull. People are not afraid to get a leg up, and be open about it. Almost everyone i know with links things that it should be "on grid" only (but they should probably fix some grid foo stuff as well). But while it is not, there is no good reason not to use them. CCP have said that in principal only on grid links is what they want, but the code base and programming is too difficult. However that didn't stop them from keeping mining links active inside a POS force field. I agree that just changing links too OGB isn't enough. Depending on what system your in , it can be incredible hard too tell if someone is using links , before your committed too a fight. You can tell if someone is in a group generally by looking at there killboard , looking at there fits ect. So your kinda right , you should automatically assume people are using links , Another reason not too engage. Just what we need , more factors that make people only fight when they are sure they are going to win.
Sir Constantin 28	Posted - 2015.03.09 16:18:45 - [77] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: Would you prefer if I put my boostalt into a falcon instead? Or rather want an odd curse, or should I just get a scimitar? It's called force multiplier for a reason. Also, boosts range from 18-30% mostly. Get your numbers straight before you complain, or try sitting on both sides. Falcons and and scmis are fine, they have their place in the game. I just don't like imbalanced mechanics, like dying to a brawling frigate that can kite more than a really good kiting frigate. Delt0r Garsk wrote: Dude we don't do hashtags anymore. Well unless your on twitter or currently 16 and think it is something new. And if you think its pay to win, then I guess you don't like deadspace mods, of faction hulls, or people that get their **** together and have drugs on hand? Oh my you must hate people with friends that can always out number you. Lets be honest you just don't like it when other people kill you. No matter how much you derped. I don't even have a twitter account, i saw people doing this and i was trying to be cool Desdspace mods, drugs.. This reasoning is like the one where people put the 3'rd party software like evemon and eft on the same par with multiboxing software like isboxer..
Daerrol Furtherance. 43	Posted - 2015.03.09 17:53:59 - [78] - Quote I engage ships all the time without second thought to weather they have links or do not have links. I do not own a link character (anymore) but many of my friends do, and have often done pew-dee-pew both with and without links. There are ways to test if a ship has links. Everyone is shouting about risk averse then in the next breath says "I can't get a fight because I don't knwo if the person has links or not!" You also do not know if they are rocking a deadspace fit rifter with improved drugs and perfect skills. You also don't know if recons are going to declaok. You also don't know if their buddies are logged off on this gate. I feel like people who whine about Links when they die would just find something new to whine about. Look at what happened to those poor carriers :-( I've said it before and I'll say it again: Peopel who want a 0 loss 100 kill KB are going to get one. fighter assist, links, drugs, station games, gate camps whatever... Most players don't want a fair fight stop expecting it.
Steve Ronuken Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM 5016	Posted - 2015.03.09 18:16:00 - [79] - Quote To fill in some technical detail: Right now, Links only take effect when: A: They're turned on/off B: When someone session changes. (Session changes are big and expensive anyway. Everything gets recalculated for a character) That's relatively easy to work with, without requiring frequent tests. Making them grid restricted is substantially more work. Making them ranged is a lot more. Right now, the Dogma attribute engine is being rewritten, which /may/ (it's been stated as a goal) allow for this to be done in a less expensive fashion, which makes it viable. Once that's complete, it's a lot more viable to restrict them more than 'in the same system' Woo! CSM 9! Fuzzwork Enterprises Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 7	Posted - 2015.03.09 18:54:56 - [80] - Quote Daerrol wrote: I engage ships all the time without second thought to weather they have links or do not have links. I do not own a link character (anymore) but many of my friends do, and have often done pew-dee-pew both with and without links. There are ways to test if a ship has links. Everyone is shouting about risk averse then in the next breath says "I can't get a fight because I don't knwo if the person has links or not!" You also do not know if they are rocking a deadspace fit rifter with improved drugs and perfect skills. You also don't know if recons are going to declaok. You also don't know if their buddies are logged off on this gate. I feel like people who whine about Links when they die would just find something new to whine about. Look at what happened to those poor carriers :-( I've said it before and I'll say it again: Peopel who want a 0 loss 100 kill KB are going to get one. fighter assist, links, drugs, station games, gate camps whatever... Most players don't want a fair fight stop expecting it. Man, I engage linked gangs all the time. That's not the point. The point is that your viable tactical options against linked enemies are often reduced to not fighting at all or running at time. That's just dumped down pvp since actual piloting skills get diminished by the huge stat boosts links provide -especially when it comes to speed and web range.Have you ever tried to kite a linked gang in an unlinked ship? Since i really don't care about kb stats or isk too much i'll engage anyway but unlinked players who don't happen to be rich just don't have that option. They just won't engage and since fights are not always easy to get that can be very very frustrating. Hence links make solo and small gang pvp for players without links a huge pita. Let a rifter be a rifter (within certain boundaries)! Let there be more action for everyone

Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 7	Posted - 2015.03.09 19:05:15 - [81] - Quote Steve Ronuken wrote: To fill in some technical detail: Right now, Links only take effect when: A: They're turned on/off B: When someone session changes. (Session changes are big and expensive anyway. Everything gets recalculated for a character) That's relatively easy to work with, without requiring frequent tests. Making them grid restricted is substantially more work. Making them ranged is a lot more. Right now, the Dogma attribute engine is being rewritten, which /may/ (it's been stated as a goal) allow for this to be done in a less expensive fashion, which makes it viable. Once that's complete, it's a lot more viable to restrict them more than 'in the same system' I get that but don't you think that CCP should give us something until the Dogma rewrite may or may not solve this issue? As others have stated there are quite some ways to do that. Making them show up on kb's would be a good start to reduce ogb cheesyness just a little bit! Tbh I'm not quite sure if CCP understands how frustrating links are for a great many players. I mean this has been going on for years...
Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1677	Posted - 2015.03.09 19:18:32 - [82] - Quote The end of Off grid boosting will make EVE PvP a bit worse. What do you think? That EVE Players engage in fights they think the ennemi can win?? EVE Players engage when they think they will win. Off Grid Boosting allows that extra unexpected edge to defeat your opponents in a seemingly unbalanced engagement. Removing it would seriously impair solo PvP. Besides, both sides can do Off Grid Boosting. There is literally nothing more balanced than that. A perfectly symetrical mecanic. Go ahead and bring your booster on-grid! Now exposed to a multitude of new threats, you have to dedicate a human player to play it instead of using an alt... Except that boosters are flying bricks, there is literally nothing more boring to fly Good job, you've just made EVE PVP worse and you've created an extremely boring role, mandatory in every serious fleet. Really, what a brilliant idea. Signature Tanking Best Tanking
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 7	Posted - 2015.03.09 19:28:48 - [83] - Quote Altrue wrote: The end of Off grid boosting will make eve PvP a bit worse. What do you think? That EVE Players engage in fights they think the ennemi can win?? EVE Players engage when they think they will win. Off Grid Boosting allows that extra unexpected edge to defeat your opponents in a seemingly unbalanced engagement. Removing it would seriously impair solo PvP. Besides, both sides can do OGB. Yes, there are many players who don't fight for silly kb stats but for the sake of fighting. These are the type of players that make eve pvp fun for everyone simply because they deliver action for everyone! The end of ogb will make eve pvp a lot better since skill will matter more and those players who won't or CAN'T(!) use links will be a lot more willing to engage. With ogb CCP caters to the type of player who only engages when he's sure about winning. This is a mistake! Also: There is no such thing as solo pvp with links.
Harrison Tato Yamato Holdings 310	Posted - 2015.03.10 03:22:13 - [84] - Quote Altrue wrote: The end of Off grid boosting will make EVE PvP a bit worse. What do you think? That EVE Players engage in fights they think the ennemi can win?? Really, what a brilliant idea. I am pretty sure that almost every player who has attacked me thought they could win. I sometimes jump into something hopeless for the fun of it but not most of the time.
Mephiztopheleze Republic University Minmatar Republic 35	Posted - 2015.03.10 04:13:14 - [85] - Quote my $0.02 Off grid boosting is complete and utter rabid bollocks. Rewards are supposed to come with Risk, there's very little risk involved with a links Tengu fitted to be nigh-on impossible to scan down with probes bouncing between safe spots. It's a ridiculous mechanic that simply increases the gap between newbies and bittervets. Losing links won't hurt the veteran players one jot seeing as everyone will lose them. The only advantage goes to those who never had access to them in the first place. All Leadership Skills boosts or link modules should only apply when said booster is on-grid and uncloaked with their fleet. Occasional Resident Newbie Correspondent for TMC: http://themittani.com/search/site/mephiztopheleze
Vazkez Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 5	Posted - 2015.03.10 04:38:55 - [86] - Quote Off grid boosting should be removed imo. And yeah, its highly homosexual.
Vazkez Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 5	Posted - 2015.03.10 04:39:47 - [87] - Quote Mephiztopheleze wrote: my $0.02 Off grid boosting is complete and utter rabid bollocks. Rewards are supposed to come with Risk, there's very little risk involved with a links Tengu fitted to be nigh-on impossible to scan down with probes bouncing between safe spots. It's a ridiculous mechanic that simply increases the gap between newbies and bittervets. Losing links won't hurt the veteran players one jot seeing as everyone will lose them. The only advantage goes to those who never had access to them in the first place. All Leadership Skills boosts or link modules should only apply when said booster is on-grid and uncloaked with their fleet. WORD NIGZ
Chewytowel Haklar Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 90	Posted - 2015.03.10 04:45:05 - [88] - Quote Unsuccessful At Everything wrote: I cant believe its this thread again! My thoughts on 'I cant believe its not butter' have changed a tad though. I just don't know if I can eat a product that doesn't believe in itself. If they really wanted to fix that, they really need to rename it 'you wont believe this isn't butter'. At least then, its on you. Right as it is, the damn tub is having a crisis, and not one person wants to do anything about it.. and its title is calling out for help. Have some self confidence you buttery spread! People buy you all the time, despite the fact that you aren't butter. Don't put thoughts in my head before I even buy you. Would you do that with any other product? I know I sure as hell wouldn't buy 'I cant believe this aint cheese!'. What the ****?!?! Im staying the hell away from that. I may even rearrange the shelves to move that stuff away from the cheeses.. just so the real cheese doesn't get some kind of complex. I can't believe this ain't balanced! :D
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34630	Posted - 2015.03.10 05:05:10 - [89] - Quote Mephiztopheleze wrote: Rewards are supposed to come with Risk, there's very little risk involved with a links Tengu fitted to be nigh-on impossible to scan down with probes bouncing between safe spots. If they are bouncing between safe spots, there are no active links. It's worth knowing the mechanics in order to make proper assessments. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34630	Posted - 2015.03.10 05:08:10 - [90] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: I get that but don't you think that CCP should give us something until the Dogma rewrite may or may not solve this issue? The only thing that needs a solution is the amount of whinging that goes on asking CCP to take responsibility for something that players are fully capable of dealing with themselves, as so many others have. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari

Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 2071	Posted - 2015.03.10 05:08:58 - [91] - Quote No! Nerf all the things I don't like, even if the reason I don't like them is because I don't know how they work!
Herzog Wolfhammer Sigma Special Tactics Group 6398	Posted - 2015.03.10 05:21:30 - [92] - Quote Global tl;dr : gudfights versus "muh stats" Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 508	Posted - 2015.03.10 09:14:12 - [93] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: I recently bought this toon and returned to EVE after a break due to rl obligations and I was shocked to see that ogb was not only still around but that it has spread like a desease and infested most of lowsec and nullsec even. Before anyone calls me a whiner let me say this: I have much love for EVE as a game and even though i don't have much time to play it I will probably keep my accounts subbed until tranquility shuts down.I'm not a "pro" and I don't care for kb stats but i do care for good fights which way too often simply get ruined by off grid boosted undercover super ships! Wasn't this supposed to be dealt with a long time ago!? Why do you even bother balancing hulls if you're allowing a condor being turned into a garmur from off grid without any notable risk?! The arguments for getting rid of this terrible mechanic are well known so I won't enumerate them again but seriously: CCP, get your stuff together! You guys know what a turn off ogb is for half of the pvp community, you know how it caters to a dumped down, tedious, slow and risk-averse playsyle that is literally poison to pvp as a whole! If the dogma rewrite still takes time give us something in the meantime! This bullshit mechanic has been around for way too long and not everybody is enough of an eve fanboy to endure your disregard in that respect.CCP, do something! It's a conflict of interest for CCP. Long story short OGB alts make them $ and they'd be foolish to remove that. Quantify their thought process like this: on SISI they allow booster alts to sit on station and therefore be immune to dickery from other players. It's their whole policy right now in a nutshell, don't rock the boat, don't kill the OGB don't collect 200 and whatever you do don't make links modules function like bastion and give weapons timers and don't make them have a minimum activation range of greater than 50km. Link boats in lowsec: sit at 0 on a gate, as soon as aggressed jump through gate. Link boat in nullsec, sit at pos. link boat in highsec: be neutral alt, sit literally anywhere and be immune to everything forever especially if you have a premade safe from a mission run by the main (which can be up to 15au away from a celestial IIRC ergo unscannable). Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Ddolik Viscosity Fidelas Constans 20	Posted - 2015.03.10 11:10:55 - [94] - Quote im with you guyz, no more offgrid boosting
Chance Ravinne WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 122	Posted - 2015.03.10 14:37:36 - [95] - Quote I love when people say it's fait because both sides can do it. They can only do it if their PC can handle it. You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
Mag's the united 19126	Posted - 2015.03.10 14:49:24 - [96] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Mr Epeen wrote: Both fleets in an engagement can use OGB. I find it difficult to see the 'risk free advantage' here. Mr Epeen You're missing the point. Not everybody is willing or able to run a booster. Forcing people to run a second account to compete in small scale or solo pvp is a huge turn off. Furthermore the sheer existance of ogb penalizes players who like fast paced, spontanious and mobile pvp. It caters to risk-averse stationary pvp. For inherent logical reasons that decreases the total number of fights happening which equals to: bad for EVE pvp which equals to: Bad mechanic being bad for EVE. It's really as simple as that. The question remains: Why doesn't CCP take action? So here's what happens. CCP changes it to on grid and you still fail, because not everyone is willing to use the tools available. Apparently. So even is CCP change it, you and others like you will still whine. Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
BoBoZoBo Paragon Fury Tactical Narcotics Team 523	Posted - 2015.03.10 15:25:15 - [97] - Quote This is not an issue when both sides can take advantage of the same mechanic. I do not understand the logic not not allowing it other than you are pissed someone was doing i and you were not. Edit - I will agree they should not be allowed to do so in a POS shield or somewhere they are not exposed to risk. Maybe even increase the sig radius of ships using it to allows for others to scan them down. Primary Test Subject GÇó SmackTalker Elite
Black Drake 17	Posted - 2015.03.10 15:55:51 - [98] - Quote But wouldn't people just fly their command ships hundreds of km's away from the fight then warp away if someone comes close?
No Class The Scope Gallente Federation 1	Posted - 2015.03.10 16:22:20 - [99] - Quote I trained an alt in the boost skills. Never use them now. What i find more useful is the leadership skills. Guess what? those are off grid boosters also. Are you willing to sacrifice a leadership skill nerf as well as warfare Links?
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 10	Posted - 2015.03.10 17:37:29 - [100] - Quote Mag's wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: Mr Epeen wrote: Both fleets in an engagement can use OGB. I find it difficult to see the 'risk free advantage' here. Mr Epeen You're missing the point. Not everybody is willing or able to run a booster. Forcing people to run a second account to compete in small scale or solo pvp is a huge turn off. Furthermore the sheer existance of ogb penalizes players who like fast paced, spontanious and mobile pvp. It caters to risk-averse stationary pvp. For inherent logical reasons that decreases the total number of fights happening which equals to: bad for EVE pvp which equals to: Bad mechanic being bad for EVE. It's really as simple as that. The question remains: Why doesn't CCP take action? So here's what happens. CCP changes it to on grid and you still fail, because not everyone is willing to use the tools available. Apparently. So even is CCP change it, you and others like you will still whine. As i said I don't consider myself a pro at all but in my experience the real pros aka the best solo pilots out there dislike links. A lot. Why do you think this is? I'll answer it for you: Because they understand that ogb tendentially turns EVE pvp from a game of skill to a game of alts. This is also the reason why many pvpers get so touchy when it comes to a potential nerf of their beloved link alts. They know that their feeling of leetnes depends on them. In other words: Since the huge benefits of ogb's come with no disadvantage or notable risk whatsoever and since they don't turn up on kb's they are basically pay to win ego boosters. At the expense of others.

Alavaria Fera GoonWaffe 6602	Posted - 2015.03.10 17:50:31 - [101] - Quote BoBoZoBo wrote: This is not an issue when both sides can take advantage of the same mechanic. I do not understand the logic not not allowing it other than you are pissed someone was doing i and you were not. Edit - I will agree they should not be allowed to do so in a POS shield or somewhere they are not exposed to risk. Maybe even increase the sig radius of ships using it to allows for others to scan them down. Well you can only give mining boosts from inside a pos shield now so heh ^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears. Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 10	Posted - 2015.03.10 17:58:12 - [102] - Quote BoBoZoBo wrote: This is not an issue when both sides can take advantage of the same mechanic. I do not understand the logic not not allowing it other than you are pissed someone was doing i and you were not. Edit - I will agree they should not be allowed to do so in a POS shield or somewhere they are not exposed to risk. Maybe even increase the sig radius of ships using it to allows for others to scan them down. C'mon now, it's the inherent logic of links that one side has them and the other doesn't. In your logic solo pvpers would be forced to run at least two accounts not to have an advantage but to simply play the game on the same level as others. Now think about accessability and about what is hurting EVE's appeal to newer players the most. When you finished ask yourself if ogb is a good mechanic.
Leonardo Adami Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 2	Posted - 2015.03.10 18:10:56 - [103] - Quote Scipio Artelius wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: Furthermore the sheer existance of ogb penalizes players who like fast paced, spontanious and mobile pvp. It caters to risk-averse stationary pvp. For inherent logical reasons that decreases the total number of fights happening which equals to: bad for EVE pvp which equals to: Bad mechanic being bad for EVE. It's really as simple as that. The question remains: Why doesn't CCP take action? If I can offer a counter argument to that, my experience is almost the opposite of what you are saying here. Before I trained a links character I was reluctant to take fights outnumbered. But seeing how extensive the use of links is in lowsec, I trained a character up (pw. q1w2e3r4). She is far from slow and static, though her Loki doesn't warp as fast as a frigate or a T1 cruiser when I roam. She is used to scout as well as provide links, so gives me eyes in 2 systems at once, providing more knowledge of what is happening around. But mostly, having the links has allowed me to take more fights than I otherwise would because I will happily engage well outnumbered. 17:1 (17:2 including the links) is the largest fight I have taken on (I died of course, but took several down beforehand). Links can move fast and promote anything but risk aversion. Fighting outnumbered creates good fights for everyone and has had flow on effects into other areas. When I began FCing, having taken on a lot of fights outnumbered on my own (as a player), I already had a relatively good skillset in selecting targets and identifying which to take down first. That has bought better fights to my corpmates too when we are in fleet, whether we are running links or not. Would I really care if links were changed? Not really. I'm already training my links alt up to be on-grid at some point in the future, but links aren't a magic pill. Good piloting can still counter the benefit that someone else gains through links. Truth this Capsuleer speaks, agree I must.
Bullet Therapist Caldari Provisions Caldari State 273	Posted - 2015.03.10 21:01:22 - [104] - Quote I posted in another thread a few days ago about scanning boosters down, which I've seen a few people mention here. I've made a successful niche for myself scanning down the boosting ships and I'd like to share my experience. Once you've got the virtue implants, which are the biggest hurdle to scanning, the rest is relatively straightforward. I've seen people fit them to covops cruisers, but I find that t3 ships are much more suitable as they can be interdiction nullified, allowing you to relatively safely use them in nullsec. I like the tengu because it has the most available midslots for scanning upgrades, which make the process much easier. Identifying a t3 booster is easy, as they're typically the lowest strength signature ID present in a system. You can get a few false positives with ships like EAFs, but it isn't terribly common. Few boosters that I've caught made an attempt to warp away while I was scanning them, even if they were holed up in a legacy deep safe. I can't say for sure why, but I think that most players using boosters are multiboxing and suffer from an attention deficit while doing so. Every t3 booster is easily destroyed by the appropriate stealth bomber, particularly so when they do not fit a prop module, which, in my experience, most do not. I've experimented with using a sabre in nullsec, but overall, I like using torpedo bombers more for the purpose. Often, players respond to your aggression, but it's usually too late by the time you've scrammed the booster. I start out with my torpedo launchers and target painter overheated; the extra DPS and application are a good assurance that you'll be able to pop the booster before support arrives and burning out my modules is rarely an issue. I'm usually willing to sacrifice a bomber for a booster kill, so I'll hang on until the last second to get that last shot in if need be. If they're sitting on a POS, I've found that using a cheap, fast locking alpha thrasher and a few friends works quite well, and if you dont have friends available, it's worth a try in a cheap destroyer. With good warpins I've been able to kill boosters with as few as two DPS ships and a well placed bump. Also, I've often seen people complain about an opponent using links, only to find that they're not using them at all. Links are commonplace now, but they're certainly not as ubiquitous as people claim.
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 10	Posted - 2015.03.10 22:28:10 - [105] - Quote Bullet Therapist wrote: I posted in another thread a few days ago about scanning boosters down, which I've seen a few people mention here. I've made a successful niche for myself scanning down the boosting ships and I'd like to share my experience. Once you've got the virtue implants, which are the biggest hurdle to scanning, the rest is relatively straightforward. I've seen people fit them to covops cruisers, but I find that t3 ships are much more suitable as they can be interdiction nullified, allowing you to relatively safely use them in nullsec. I like the tengu because it has the most available midslots for scanning upgrades, which make the process much easier. Identifying a t3 booster is easy, as they're typically the lowest strength signature ID present in a system. You can get a few false positives with ships like EAFs, but it isn't terribly common. Few boosters that I've caught made an attempt to warp away while I was scanning them, even if they were holed up in a legacy deep safe. I can't say for sure why, but I think that most players using boosters are multiboxing and suffer from an attention deficit while doing so. Every t3 booster is easily destroyed by the appropriate stealth bomber, particularly so when they do not fit a prop module, which, in my experience, most do not. I've experimented with using a sabre in nullsec, but overall, I like using torpedo bombers more for the purpose. Often, players respond to your aggression, but it's usually too late by the time you've scrammed the booster. I start out with my torpedo launchers and target painter overheated; the extra DPS and application are a good assurance that you'll be able to pop the booster before support arrives and burning out my modules is rarely an issue. I'm usually willing to sacrifice a bomber for a booster kill, so I'll hang on until the last second to get that last shot in if need be. If they're sitting on a POS, I've found that using a cheap, fast locking alpha thrasher and a few friends works quite well, and if you dont have friends available, it's worth a try in a cheap destroyer. With good warpins I've been able to kill boosters with as few as two DPS ships and a well placed bump. Also, I've often seen people complain about an opponent using links, only to find that they're not using them at all. Links are commonplace now, but they're certainly not as ubiquitous as people claim. Link km's of the boosters you destroyed, would you? Any competent pilot shouldn't lose a boosting t3. Ever. At the end of the day these things are ridiculously safe. Apart from that: The fact that you might be able to kill uncautious booster pilots if you dedicate yourself to that task (and bring some friends) doesn't male ogb any less terrible in the vast majority of pvp situations. Personally i would find killing defenseless boosters utterly boring tbh. I guess that's just the kind of pvp links promote.
Tau Cabalander Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs 4669	Posted - 2015.03.10 22:41:52 - [106] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: When we have any timelines to report we'll report them, in the meantime all I can say is that it will happen sometime between now and the end of time. Very likely closer to now than to the end of time, but those things are hard to be certain about. CCP Fozzie wrote: It's a performance optimization problem. We could turn on range-based boosting in Odyssey [released on Tuesday, June 4th, 2013] but it would melt all the servers. And this isn't being delayed by Odyssey, the team working on the underlying code that will make ongrid boosting possible (along with many other things) isn't releasing anything in Odyssey. It's just that big of a project. So like I said before, at some point CCP Veritas will make all my ganglink-related dreams come true but I honestly do not know when that point will be. When Veritas describes a programming challenge as "very hard" I tend to believe him.
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34676	Posted - 2015.03.10 22:47:37 - [107] - Quote I think we've reached the level where these need to be handed out in this thread now. It'll happen when it happens. Even then, the claims of unfairness will continue and if it goes to a straight on grid thing, grid foo will make for some interesting changes in play. Will be fun. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 10	Posted - 2015.03.10 23:11:42 - [108] - Quote Scipio Artelius wrote: I think we've reached the level where these need to be handed out in this thread now. It'll happen when it happens. Even then, the claims of unfairness will continue and if it goes to a straight on grid thing, grid foo will make for some interesting changes in play. Will be fun. Which claims of unfairness? That was never the point. The point was that ogb makes eve a worse game. It does so for reasons stated many times. The fact that the proponents of ogb always try to distort the very specific and profound criticism of ogb to general whining about unfairness says something about the proponents of ogb. imo
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34676	Posted - 2015.03.10 23:16:46 - [109] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Which claims of unfairness? That was never the point. The point was that ogb makes eve a worse game. It does so for reasons stated many times. The fact that the proponents of ogb always try to distort the very specific and profound criticism of ogb to general whining about unfairness says something about the proponents of ogb. imo Here, have another. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 11	Posted - 2015.03.10 23:35:31 - [110] - Quote Scipio Artelius wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: Which claims of unfairness? That was never the point. The point was that ogb makes eve a worse game. It does so for reasons stated many times. The fact that the proponents of ogb always try to distort the very specific and profound criticism of ogb to general whining about unfairness says something about the proponents of ogb. imo Here, have another. Man, I just hope i'll never need these because pretty much the only thing about this game which could potentially make me sad would be seeing it go to maintenance mode cause CCP didn't tackle major turn offs like ogb in time. Anyway, lets hope for the best

Lugia3 The Southern Gentleman's Social Club Psychotic Tendencies. 1492	Posted - 2015.03.11 05:56:25 - [111] - Quote Mr Epeen wrote: Both fleets in an engagement can use OGB. I find it difficult to see the 'risk free advantage' here. Mr Epeen Barrier of entry to be competitive. "CCP Dolan is full of shit." - CCP Bettik Remove Sov!
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 2	Posted - 2015.03.11 07:40:14 - [112] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: I recently bought this toon and returned to EVE after a break due to rl obligations and I was shocked to see that ogb was not only still around but that it has spread like a desease and infested most of lowsec and nullsec even. Before anyone calls me a whiner let me say this: I have much love for EVE as a game and even though i don't have much time to play it I will probably keep my accounts subbed until tranquility shuts down.I'm not a "pro" and I don't care for kb stats but i do care for good fights which way too often simply get ruined by off grid boosted undercover super ships! Wasn't this supposed to be dealt with a long time ago!? Why do you even bother balancing hulls if you're allowing a condor being turned into a garmur from off grid without any notable risk?! The arguments for getting rid of this terrible mechanic are well known so I won't enumerate them again but seriously: CCP, get your stuff together! You guys know what a turn off ogb is for half of the pvp community, you know how it caters to a dumped down, tedious, slow and risk-averse playsyle that is literally poison to pvp as a whole! If the dogma rewrite still takes time give us something in the meantime! This bullshit mechanic has been around for way too long and not everybody is enough of an eve fanboy to endure your disregard in that respect.CCP, do something! Haha, you remind me of myself a year ago when I couldn't stand off-grid boosters and thought that it was such an unfair advantage to players who didn't have one that I gave up on solo pvping. And now that I've finally trained up for one I think they are fantastic so I disagree with your whining to CCP about OGB now of all times. Do yourself a favor and either go buy an OGB toon on Char Bazaar or quit been lazy and trained up for one like everyone else has down until now.
Demerius Xenocratus Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation 130	Posted - 2015.03.11 09:01:29 - [113] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: Dude we don't do hashtags anymore. Well unless your on twitter or currently 16 and think it is something new. And if you think its pay to win, then I guess you don't like deadspace mods, of faction hulls, or people that get their **** together and have drugs on hand? Oh my you must hate people with friends that can always out number you. Lets be honest you just don't like it when other people kill you. No matter how much you derped. All of those things have to be risked on grid.
Demerius Xenocratus Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation 130	Posted - 2015.03.11 09:06:39 - [114] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: Demerius Xenocratus wrote: You're telling me a 900 man nullsec blob can't log a virtue prober alt and kill or force you to turn off links with 2 minutes? A pimped helios for 70mil with a 20mil implant has the required scanstrength already. You don't need virtues for that since 2014. My point is even stronger then. The "b-but small gangs!" argument vis-a-vis links assumes that the larger force won't use a portion of their numbers (1 ship) to neutralize offgrid links. It's solo and very small gang fights with close to even numbers where there's simply nothing you can do but blueball link users.
Lancastor Dex BLUE Regiment. 38	Posted - 2015.03.11 09:22:31 - [115] - Quote There is no harm in OGBs, All the parties in the engagement have an option to bring some in. If one of the parties is not willing/too lazy not to bring one on their own it's not a faulty game mechanic, they are just obviously Njoying pissing against the wind. My advice is - fix the retards and whiners, not properly working game mechanic.
McChicken Combo HalfMayo The Happy Meal 451	Posted - 2015.03.11 09:46:36 - [116] - Quote If you remove OGB those same players will just bring that alt on grid in an ECM or Logi boat. Don't expect OGB removal to magically create honor. ~ Bookmarks in overview ~ Fleet improvements
Mr Duffo Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF 76	Posted - 2015.03.11 10:01:55 - [117] - Quote Bring boosters on grid and everyone is happy. This would add more depth to fleet tactics imo
Irya Boone Never Surrender. 439	Posted - 2015.03.11 10:17:36 - [118] - Quote Yes CCP get rid of OFF grid Boost Or disable the auto-repeat on links modules so you have to be active on the Boost to give boost or some code like the more far your are from the fleet = Less boost etc etc so many options here But please do something ccp before next release !! CCP it's time to remove Off Grid Boost and Put Them on Killmail too, add Logi on killmails .... Open that damn door !!
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34684	Posted - 2015.03.11 11:11:52 - [119] - Quote Mr Duffo wrote: Bring boosters on grid and everyone is happy. This would add more depth to fleet tactics imo On grid won't be the solution to this non-problem. It will need to be range limited. Grid foo will allow links ships to be on grid but well out of reach of the opposing ships/fleet. Not for every engagement obviously, but for anything important or any engagement where there is time to setup (and people will still complain). Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 16	Posted - 2015.03.11 11:27:18 - [120] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: I recently bought this toon and returned to EVE after a break due to rl obligations and I was shocked to see that ogb was not only still around but that it has spread like a desease and infested most of lowsec and nullsec even. Before anyone calls me a whiner let me say this: I have much love for EVE as a game and even though i don't have much time to play it I will probably keep my accounts subbed until tranquility shuts down.I'm not a "pro" and I don't care for kb stats but i do care for good fights which way too often simply get ruined by off grid boosted undercover super ships! Wasn't this supposed to be dealt with a long time ago!? Why do you even bother balancing hulls if you're allowing a condor being turned into a garmur from off grid without any notable risk?! The arguments for getting rid of this terrible mechanic are well known so I won't enumerate them again but seriously: CCP, get your stuff together! You guys know what a turn off ogb is for half of the pvp community, you know how it caters to a dumped down, tedious, slow and risk-averse playsyle that is literally poison to pvp as a whole! If the dogma rewrite still takes time give us something in the meantime! This bullshit mechanic has been around for way too long and not everybody is enough of an eve fanboy to endure your disregard in that respect.CCP, do something! Haha, you remind me of myself a year ago when I couldn't stand off-grid boosters and thought that it was such an unfair advantage to players who didn't have one that I gave up on solo pvping. And now that I've finally trained up for one I think they are fantastic so I disagree with your whining to CCP about OGB now of all times. Do yourself a favor and either go buy an OGB toon on Char Bazaar or quit been lazy and trained up for one like everyone else has down until now. What feels fantastic is that you are able to enjoy solo and small gang pvp without a huge bult in disadvantage. Wouldn't it be great if everybody could jump into pvp and enjoy pvp the same way as you do now? If everbody had a booster -as you and others suggest it should be- it might feel a little less fantastic too since your advantage at the expense of non link users will be completely diminished. The only difference to pvp without a booster will be the annoying side effects of carrying around a t3. When flying a "solo" frig everybody will just be forced to stare on a second monitor and roams will be reduced to cruiser warp speed. You and others have to understand that using links is a zero sum game: you only gain something at the expense of others and when everybody uses them all what remains is sillyness It's short term goals vs long terms goals really. Shortly it may feel great to have a (ego) booster but in the long run it hurts the game itself. EVE might win some alt accounts but it loses real active players about this and most importantly: A LOT LESS NEW PLAYERS WILL START PLAYING EVE WHEN THEY HEAR ABOUT LINKS! Sorry for the caps but you guys need to get that already. It's bad for the game! At least I have to admit that I did buy a booster alt at some point just to try it and i hated it. Kiting became ridiculously easy and when I killed a guy who is generally a better than me and flew pefectly timed slingshots against me but still coudln't catch me I turned off in disgust and put my booster alt on the char bazaar the same evening.

Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 16	Posted - 2015.03.11 11:35:32 - [121] - Quote Scipio Artelius wrote: Mr Duffo wrote: Bring boosters on grid and everyone is happy. This would add more depth to fleet tactics imo On grid won't be the solution to this non-problem. It will need to be range limited. Grid foo will allow links ships to be on grid but well out of reach of the opposing ships/fleet. Not for every engagement obviously, but for anything important or any engagement where there is time to setup (and people will still complain). On grid will be a HUGE betterment to now since you could easily see not only that there is a booster but which booster. Put it on KB's aswell and personally i could live with that. It would make a terribble mechanic a lot less terrible and a lot easier to live with.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 316	Posted - 2015.03.11 11:44:49 - [122] - Quote We do use links a bit. But we also roam without them a bit too. Getting links into system and safed up is not always easy, it still has to go through the same gates and WHs as every other ship. And they are not magic. Link ships typically compromise a lot of the fit to get a full set of links. aka not a lot of tank. No prop mod, etc. Taking on fleets with links is also not so bad. You just need to know what the links do and adapt. The difference between t2 hulls and t1 hulls is far larger, and that never stopped us taking on the fight. CCP have said they can't make links grid/range only till there is a big code base change. So OGB is not changing anytime soon. Deal with it. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34690	Posted - 2015.03.11 11:50:13 - [123] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: On grid will be a HUGE betterment to now since you could easily see not only that there is a booster but which booster. Put it on KB's aswell and personally i could live with that. It would make a terribble mechanic a lot less terrible and a lot easier to live with. It is easy to live with already. But just, on grid, will not stop the moaning and groaning, because some people will still self-limit themselves and then complain to CCP that it needs to be fixed. What may be acceptable to one person, won't be acceptable to someone else. The only change will be who is doing the crying, instead of dealing with it. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Brian Harrelstein Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 17	Posted - 2015.03.11 11:56:20 - [124] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Not everybody is willing or able to run a booster. Forcing people to run a second account to compete in small scale or solo pvp is a huge turn off. Cry some more. If you can't compete because of an enemy command ship booster, then bring more people, or bite the bullet and boost your fleet as well. What are you going to complain about next, blobs?
March rabbit Federal Defense Union 1554	Posted - 2015.03.11 12:01:05 - [125] - Quote i have seen this in many small games: you can pay real money for next level or some stuff you can but lazy to get with ingame means. Why not make it in Eve? Let's say i want to kill this particular pilot/ship. I just too lazy to do it. I select it in overview, press button 'pay for kill' and BOOM! Money paid, killmail is ready and pilot goes to cloning facility. Stupid you say? Why? This is Eve: nothing needs to be fair game. You want to be 'competitive'? Just use whatever you can to get upper hand. You are paying for second account with booster to get 'solo' kills? Ok. You pay real money for special button to get the same kill? Ok too. The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Ddolik Viscosity Fidelas Constans 22	Posted - 2015.03.11 12:01:49 - [126] - Quote i support no more offgrid boosting
Lfod Shi Lfod's Ratting and Salvage 231	Posted - 2015.03.11 12:04:20 - [127] - Quote Solo player, one account, stands little to no chance. It's not a matter of energy or $$, we simply should not need more than one account to compete. Whatever. Adapt or die, right? Well, I can't compete but I can run and hide with the best of 'em! So I do, even gave myself an award for it. Check my decorations. GÖ¬ They'll always be bloodclaws to me GÖ½
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 16	Posted - 2015.03.11 12:05:44 - [128] - Quote Scipio Artelius wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: On grid will be a HUGE betterment to now since you could easily see not only that there is a booster but which booster. Put it on KB's aswell and personally i could live with that. It would make a terribble mechanic a lot less terrible and a lot easier to live with. It is easy to live with already. But just, on grid, will not stop the moaning and groaning, because some people will still self-limit themselves and then complain to CCP that it needs to be fixed. What may be acceptable to one person, won't be acceptable to someone else. The only change will be who is doing the crying, instead of dealing with it. Dealing with it like getting a booster alt or stop flying solo? Did you read what I and others wrote in this thread? You need to understand that the vast majority of the critics of ogb are not notorious whiners. They see ogb as the bad mechanic it is and that reality won't change no matter how often you claim the problem is non existant -disregarding the arguments and concerns of your fellow eve players. I hope that CCP will be less ignorant in that regard and finally give us something before brain in a box is ready. Make them turn up on KB's. Something little. Just a little concession that non-link users concerns are relevant to CCP as they should be since these are the concerns of paying customers which basically have been ignored for years.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 3	Posted - 2015.03.11 12:09:45 - [129] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: I recently bought this toon and returned to EVE after a break due to rl obligations and I was shocked to see that ogb was not only still around but that it has spread like a desease and infested most of lowsec and nullsec even. Before anyone calls me a whiner let me say this: I have much love for EVE as a game and even though i don't have much time to play it I will probably keep my accounts subbed until tranquility shuts down.I'm not a "pro" and I don't care for kb stats but i do care for good fights which way too often simply get ruined by off grid boosted undercover super ships! Wasn't this supposed to be dealt with a long time ago!? Why do you even bother balancing hulls if you're allowing a condor being turned into a garmur from off grid without any notable risk?! The arguments for getting rid of this terrible mechanic are well known so I won't enumerate them again but seriously: CCP, get your stuff together! You guys know what a turn off ogb is for half of the pvp community, you know how it caters to a dumped down, tedious, slow and risk-averse playsyle that is literally poison to pvp as a whole! If the dogma rewrite still takes time give us something in the meantime! This bullshit mechanic has been around for way too long and not everybody is enough of an eve fanboy to endure your disregard in that respect.CCP, do something! Haha, you remind me of myself a year ago when I couldn't stand off-grid boosters and thought that it was such an unfair advantage to players who didn't have one that I gave up on solo pvping. And now that I've finally trained up for one I think they are fantastic so I disagree with your whining to CCP about OGB now of all times. Do yourself a favor and either go buy an OGB toon on Char Bazaar or quit been lazy and trained up for one like everyone else has down until now. What feels fantastic is that you are able to enjoy solo and small gang pvp without a huge built-in disadvantage. Wouldn't it be great if everybody could jump into pvp and enjoy pvp the same way as you do now? If everbody had a booster -as you and others suggest it should be- it might feel a little less fantastic too since your advantage at the expense of non link users will be completely diminished. The only difference to pvp without a booster will be the annoying side effects of carrying around a t3. When flying a "solo" frig everybody will just be forced to stare on a second monitor and roams will be reduced to cruiser warp speed. You and others have to understand that using links is a zero sum game: you only gain something at the expense of others and when everybody uses them all what remains is sillyness and artifically pushed up local. It's short term goals vs long terms goals really. Shortly it may feel great to have a (ego) booster but in the long run it hurts the game itself. EVE might win some alt accounts but it loses real active players about this and most importantly: LESS NEW PLAYERS WILL START PLAYING EVE WHEN THEY HEAR ABOUT LINKS! Sorry for the caps but you guys need to get that already. It's bad for the game! At least I have to admit that I did buy a booster alt at some point just to try it and i hated it. Kiting became ridiculously easy and when I killed a guy who is generally a better than me and flew pefectly timed slingshots against me but still coudln't catch me I turned off in disgust and put my booster alt on the char bazaar the same evening. Hmm I kind of get at what you're saying now. You're one of those rare types that like pvping on the test of skill along with no other benefiting factors like boosters, falcons, logi alts involved. I hate to tell you this but you're not gonna find that in Eve even if CCP did remove OGB (unless they're hosting a contest). I've been on the receiving end of the not so honorable tactics that you've mentioned and then some so I can sympathize but instead of whining to CCP about it I choose to adapt. Have you seen what a linked Confessor can do? It's addicting...
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 316	Posted - 2015.03.11 12:11:01 - [130] - Quote Lfod Shi wrote: Solo player, one account, stands little to no chance. It's not a matter of energy or $$, we simply should not need more than one account to compete. Whatever. Adapt or die, right? Well, I can't compete but I can run and hide with the best of 'em! So I do, even gave myself an award for it. Check my decorations. This is just not true. One of the best players i know in eve, has not just a single account, but a single character. He solos all the time and solos well. If you think eve fights are all stats and nothing else, ie your an orbit f1 monkey, sure your out matched. If however you try and fly your ship/ships properly its a whole different game. And really your saying that you never want to be in a fight your not sure of winning. Good fights come in many shapes. Sometimes because you end up winning a fight you had no business winning at all. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.

Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 16	Posted - 2015.03.11 12:12:30 - [131] - Quote Brian Harrelstein wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: Not everybody is willing or able to run a booster. Forcing people to run a second account to compete in small scale or solo pvp is a huge turn off. Cry some more. If you can't compete because of an enemy command ship booster, then bring more people, or bite the bullet and boost your fleet as well. What are you going to complain about next, blobs? Cynos? Titan bridges? You don't understand the problem. Ogb hurts solo and small gang pvp mostly. The larger the fleet the less of an issue ogb is. If you want to comment further do some research on the topic before steretypically labeling any critcism beyond your understanding and ingame experience as whining.
Agondray Avenger Mercenaries VOID Intergalactic Forces 229	Posted - 2015.03.11 12:49:03 - [132] - Quote Lictas Alice wrote: [quote=Scipio Artelius][quote=Lictas Alice]But in my experience , its usually people in faction ships/full set of implants/ with backup/ with links at a 100% safe place( generally FW zones). Where is your experience from that this is it? There is no 100% safe spot unless they are sitting in station, you want to hit them do like 1 post on here and scan them. A command signal is a radio wave, Voyager is past the edges of the solar system and we can still tell it what to do. it sounds like what people want is to discourge the small fleets from going out to null and engaging larger fleets which means you want less PVP not more PVP. There is no SILVER BULLET FOR HAVING BOOST, the only option would get rid of boosting all together, so that no one would have boost THEN people can complain for not having them. "Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith
Speedy Conzollis Only Fools and Horses 9	Posted - 2015.03.11 12:50:59 - [133] - Quote The thing is, EVE is a multiplayer game, you are playing solo.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 316	Posted - 2015.03.11 14:00:03 - [134] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Brian Harrelstein wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: Not everybody is willing or able to run a booster. Forcing people to run a second account to compete in small scale or solo pvp is a huge turn off. Cry some more. If you can't compete because of an enemy command ship booster, then bring more people, or bite the bullet and boost your fleet as well. What are you going to complain about next, blobs? Cynos? Titan bridges? You don't understand the problem. Ogb hurts solo and small gang pvp mostly. The larger the fleet the less of an issue ogb is. If you want to comment further do some research on the topic before steretypically labeling any critcism beyond your understanding and ingame experience as whining. Links help small ganks plenty. How can links not help a small gang? Mostly people complaining here are complaining that its not true solo and other crap. Like using a scout is cheating or something equally stupid. We often roam with 2-5 ships between 2-4 players. We brings links often. Not always. We find it help a bit. Esp. with shiny fits. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
tony slarp Ministry of War Amarr Empire 1	Posted - 2015.03.11 14:18:01 - [135] - Quote Offgrid boosting simply needs to be removed and redesigned as an actual combat role that requires pilots to be on grid. It could also be an interesting approach for capital ships since their usefulness has been decreased over the past few months (and will continue to do so with the sov rework).
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34695	Posted - 2015.03.11 14:35:21 - [136] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Dealing with it like getting a booster alt or stop flying solo? No. There are other ways to deal with it. I also deal with it other ways as I don't use my links character all the time. Quote: You need to understand that the vast majority of the critics of ogb are not notorious whiners. Yes I know this already. I fit into that category. It's only the ones that contribute to threads like this and ask CCP to take responsibility to manage their own limitations that are the whiners. Quote: They see ogb as the bad mechanic it is and that reality won't change no matter how often you claim the problem is non existant -disregarding the arguments and concerns of your fellow eve players. CCP have already said they would like to change the mechanic when they can, doesn't make the current situation a problem. You already have tools at your disposal to deal with it. But you refuse to, other than to cry for CCP to handle it. Quote: I hope that CCP will be less ignorant in that regard and finally give us something before brain in a box is ready. Make them turn up on KB's. Something little. Just a little concession that non-link users concerns are relevant to CCP as they should be since these are the concerns of paying customers which basically have been ignored for years. It's not ignorance, it's impotence. Everyone is a paying customer and that's all, a customer. That doesn't entitle you to any special rights more than anyone else. If you don't like the product, then don't pay. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34695	Posted - 2015.03.11 14:45:06 - [137] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Ogb hurts solo and small gang pvp mostly. The larger the fleet the less of an issue ogb is. If you want to comment further do some research on the topic before steretypically labeling any critcism beyond your understanding and ingame experience as whining. Bullshit. Links scale with fleet size as everyone in the squad/wing/fleet receives the relevant benefit. The larger the fleet, the greater the benefit. Not the reverse. OGB help small gangs and single combat ships, not hurt them. They allow them to engage a wider variety of targets and get more fights than they would otherwise be able to engage in. But of course, you don't mean links hurt solo and small gang pvp. You just mean they hurt those that don't have links, which is also BS. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Tzar Sinak Mythic Heights 158	Posted - 2015.03.11 14:49:31 - [138] - Quote This has always been an interesting topic to me. To sum it up: The boosting vessel is always (mostly) free from being engaged directly therefore directly affecting the combat from a safe location. The non-boosted side has very limited (possibly impracticable ability to engage the boosting vessel). Therefore boost away. Both sides can. However have the boosting vessels ON grid to allow direct engagement. Is there a reason why being ON grid is so bad? By the way, OGB is an awful short form. Maybe OfGB and OnGB? Hydrostatic Podcast First class listening of all things EVE Check out the Youtube Channel and be sure to subscribe!
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34696	Posted - 2015.03.11 15:28:10 - [139] - Quote Tzar Sinak wrote: Therefore boost away. Both sides can. However have the boosting vessels ON grid to allow direct engagement. Is there a reason why being ON grid is so bad? It's not a bad approach, just not perfect either. Grids can be manipulated by players and if it was simply a change to on-grid, then grid manipulation would become the new norm for fleets/players using links. It would certainly be an approach for static situations (eg. gate camps, station camps and any situation where there is time to setup for an engagement). A distance limited effect would seem initially to be a way around this and reduce the risk that players would just manipulate the size and shape of the grid. But what distance? If a links ship is on grid and close to the fight, it would become the first primary target as often as practical. That would mean it would require significant tanking capability, or sufficient speed/distance to be able to survive. To implement an on-grid or distance limited effect, new command ships would be required at frigate and destroyer size as a minimum (to be able to enter novice and small FW plexes for example) and allow fleets to utilize their effects wherever they are needed in a fight. Something like the T3 Destroyers could be useful in a command ship role, since they can also be combat ships, so could be in the fight as well as boosting and/or just indistinguishable from the other ships in the fleet. Something would be needed at frigate size also. That would also open up opportunities for other counters to links like ewar modules that opponents can use. Additional deployable units could also be introduced that eliminate the effect from an area similar to the way cyno jammers and d-scan inhibitors work. A whole range of new possibilities could open up, but it would need to be more thought out than simply on-grid. That wouldn't change much in many situations. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Demerius Xenocratus Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation 133	Posted - 2015.03.11 15:57:23 - [140] - Quote Speedy Conzollis wrote: The thing is, EVE is a multiplayer game, you are playing solo. Multi-PLAYER, not one guy running 4 accounts on 2 screens so he can tell himself he's a solo god. Honestly putting links on killmails would be sufficient to discourage the ego boosters. But folk need to stop confusing the game of alts with "multiplayer." It's more about how much real world money I'm willing to spend to be "elite." In this context a "pay to kill" button makes just as much sense.

Natalia Abre-Kai 6	Posted - 2015.03.11 16:27:28 - [141] - Quote I wonder if/when they remove off-grid boosting how it will affect all fleet fights. Right now a squad leader can be elsewhere in space (same system), but still fulfills the role of transfering the boosts from the fleet booster (if they are higher in the chain). Needless to say that I think it would no longer be the case, once this off-grid boosting mess is "fixed". I am sure that will be a less discussed side effect of removing off-grid boosting, that many people do not think about.
Speedy Conzollis Only Fools and Horses 9	Posted - 2015.03.11 17:03:30 - [142] - Quote Demerius Xenocratus wrote: Speedy Conzollis wrote: The thing is, EVE is a multiplayer game, you are playing solo. Multi-PLAYER, not one guy running 4 accounts on 2 screens so he can tell himself he's a solo god. Honestly putting links on killmails would be sufficient to discourage the ego boosters. But folk need to stop confusing the game of alts with "multiplayer." It's more about how much real world money I'm willing to spend to be "elite." In this context a "pay to kill" button makes just as much sense. I am happy with putting links on KM, would be happier still with having logi on them as well. I play with alts as I like the extra pressure of doing multiple things at once, but I rarely play solo. My corp members all have alts for various functions, indie, links, scouts etc. It gives the game more depth to me, would hate having to wait to train one character to do all those functions and even then you couldn't multi-task the functions.
Demerius Xenocratus Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation 134	Posted - 2015.03.11 17:36:36 - [143] - Quote I think putting links on killmails would suffice for many people. Dunno how difficult that would be from a programming standpoint but surely much easier than limiting bonuses to grid.
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 25	Posted - 2015.03.11 20:19:15 - [144] - Quote Scipio Artelius wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: Ogb hurts solo and small gang pvp mostly. The larger the fleet the less of an issue ogb is. If you want to comment further do some research on the topic before steretypically labeling any critcism beyond your understanding and ingame experience as whining. Links scale with fleet size as everyone in the squad/wing/fleet receives the relevant benefit. The larger the fleet, the greater the benefit. Not the reverse. OGB help small gangs and single combat ships, not hurt them. They allow them to engage a wider variety of targets and get more fights than they would otherwise be able to engage in. But of course, you don't mean links hurt solo and small gang pvp. You just mean they hurt those that don't have links, which is BS. Ok, forgive me but at this point I'm not really sure if you just don't get links or if you're trolling. I'll try again: Links affect small scale pvp more than fleet pvp because of three simple reasons: 1. Tank to dps ratio: The smaller the gang the higher is the potential tanking boost relative to accumulated dps. That's simple math speaking for itself. 2. Positioning tactics: Small gangs/solo pilots rely on them to make up for their lesser accumulated tank and ehp. Skirmish links heavily mess with these. Manual piloting kiting proness often can't safe you from 17km webs on top of superior speed and agility. 3. Availability of ressources. The larger the gang the more likely it is that at least one fleet member has an ogb available. Availability of ressources also further penalizes guerilla warfare against larger groups in their home systems on top of fighting heavily outnumbered. Not only will the larger entities have better (command ship) links they will also more likely be able to keep the attackers from running theirs due to an increased availability of dedicated probers -or to intercept/decloak them at gates entering the system even. This advantage of stationary links in well defended home systems compared to the hassle of carrying around an inferior boosting t3 also favors stationary pvp compared to dynamic roaming. While 2. may be countered by the smaller gang running skirmish links aswell the combination of 1.2. and 3. inherently penalizes smaller gangs compared to larger gangs if links are used by both sides. When links are used by only one side smaller roaming gangs or solo pilots suffer more if the larger gang has them than the other way around since their most important tactical tools are compromised. That's it. It's late, I'm a bit drunk and I'm also lacking a bit in the english department to explain the whole thing more eloquently but nevertheless i really hope the general idea got through this time.
maCH'EttE Mafia Redux Feign Disorder 159	Posted - 2015.03.11 20:50:28 - [145] - Quote changing the OGB mechanic will only benefit the blob, instead of having them on grid so the 200 man fleets only benifit from it, and not the solo/small gang players, why not than just remove the concept of links period.
Iudicium Vastus Incognito Holdings and Savings 320	Posted - 2015.03.11 21:05:01 - [146] - Quote Until a suitable fix can come along, surely they can adjust things currently. Like make Links-in-use increase sig radius (easier probing) Can't activate within Xkm of POS And more importantly, links create aggression timer when activated (can't dock or jump gate until turned off) See this all the time in lowsec. Links hugging stations and gates. Such a cancer. [u]Nerf stabs/cloaks in FW?[/u] No, just.. -Fit more points -Fit faction points -Bring a friend or two with points (an alt is fine too)
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1948	Posted - 2015.03.11 21:34:26 - [147] - Quote Iudicium Vastus wrote: Until a suitable fix can come along, surely they can adjust things currently. Like make Links-in-use increase sig radius (easier probing) Can't activate within Xkm of POS And more importantly, links create aggression timer when activated (can't dock or jump gate until turned off) See this all the time in lowsec. Links hugging stations and gates. Such a cancer. Links increasing sig radius mean on grid links are now easy kills. Can't activate within x km of a POS means you can't defend a POS with a fleet directly ontop of the POS. Links creating aggression timers mean you can't turn your links on when roaming or you have to sit on a gate with links off for 60 seconds waiting to jump. So no, none of those things are 'easy' fixes, since they all create other problems that harm other players than your intended targets. Most specifically they harm on grid links in every case you listed.
Charadrass Angry Germans 200	Posted - 2015.03.11 21:48:08 - [148] - Quote Tl;dr. but they do talk right now about turning supers into wormhole like Boosters... even for allies, and youre talking about offgridboosting has to be removed? srsly? what do you think a superboost will be? only for a grid?
FT Cold Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 9	Posted - 2015.03.11 21:56:45 - [149] - Quote For all of the people who believe that boosters are 100% safe, you can check out my KB.
Vaju Enki Secular Wisdom 1453	Posted - 2015.03.11 22:15:01 - [150] - Quote Links on KM would help. The Tears Must Flow

FT Cold Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 9	Posted - 2015.03.11 22:20:49 - [151] - Quote Vaju Enki wrote: Links on KM would help. Look me up on zkillboard.com. It's a forum rule to not post killmails on forums other than C&P. I harass boosters from time to time, but usually just provide warp-ins, when I saw this thread I decided to grab a few solo kills today to show that it can be done.
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34698	Posted - 2015.03.11 22:46:50 - [152] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Ok, forgive me but at this point I'm not really sure if you just don't get links or if you're trolling. No need to forgive. Yes, partly trolling because it's pretty easy. Aside from that, different perspectives can all be true. There is no single one truth that rules them all. My points weren't wrong in the same way yours aren't. So no need to try again. You see it only from one side. I also understand that side, but push a different view which is equally as valid, because a broader perspective on these things is always good. Quote: 1. Tank to dps ratio: The smaller the gang the higher is the potential tanking boost relative to accumulated dps. That's simple math speaking for itself. Except that this is one point I would disagree. Not that your position is wrong, but that is looks at the issue from only 1 perspective. Links allow smaller gangs to take on larger gangs that they otherwise wouldn't consider. Each ship in the fleet gains equal benefit from the links, but by taking on a larger fleet, the incoming DPS is greater, not less. That's also simple math. I understand your perspective, but in this whole discussion you haven't acknowledged even once, the possibility that links actually benefit small gangs, only that they hurt them. It's not the full picture, because it's skewed to a single view. I'm not against changing links at all. I personally think there are plenty of opportunities to increase the gameplay options around them. Just not simply by bringing them on grid though. That wouldn't have a measurable effect for many situations and certainly wouldn't do anything to affect them in highsec pvp. My previous post outlined some other options and I am sure that there are many more and much better ones that hopefully are eventually implemented. Quote: It's late, I'm a bit drunk and I'm also lacking a bit in the english department to explain the whole thing more eloquently but nevertheless i really hope the general idea got through this time. Your general idea has been put several times. It's still no more correct than mine. They are both equally valid positions and views. Links are not the big, dirty menace destroying pvp and keeping new players from joining the game (I actually laughed at that one). They are a force multiplier like many force multipliers including ewar, logisitics and N+1 (or N+many). The counter argument against them is usually not to come cry in the forum asking CCP to deal with the issue. Most players/fleets either run them as well, counter them by killing them or forcing them to warp, dock or jump; or just totally ignore them and have fun anyway. But coming and crying in the forum and asking for CCP to change them, when CCP have already stated that they would like to at some point is no different to anyone else coming to the forum and crying for CCP to fix something they can already manage themselves. Just go manage the issue yourself until it's rebalanced or take useful suggestions to F&I for consideration down the road. That would be far more constructive than moaning in GD. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 3	Posted - 2015.03.11 22:59:46 - [153] - Quote Scipio Artelius wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: Dealing with it like getting a booster alt or stop flying solo? No. There are other ways to deal with it. I also deal with it other ways as I don't use my links character all the time. Quote: You need to understand that the vast majority of the critics of ogb are not notorious whiners. Yes I know this already. I fit into that category. It's only the ones that contribute to threads like this and ask CCP to take responsibility to manage their own limitations that are the whiners. Quote: They see ogb as the bad mechanic it is and that reality won't change no matter how often you claim the problem is non existant -disregarding the arguments and concerns of your fellow eve players. CCP have already said they would like to change the mechanic when they can, doesn't make the current situation a problem. You already have tools at your disposal to deal with it. But you refuse to, other than to cry for CCP to handle it. Quote: I hope that CCP will be less ignorant in that regard and finally give us something before brain in a box is ready. Make them turn up on KB's. Something little. Just a little concession that non-link users concerns are relevant to CCP as they should be since these are the concerns of paying customers which basically have been ignored for years. It's not ignorance, it's impotence. Everyone is a paying customer and that's all, a customer. That doesn't entitle you to any special rights more than anyone else. If you don't like the product, then don't pay. Well said, you get a +1 from me.
Lienzo Amanuensis 48	Posted - 2015.03.12 04:14:08 - [154] - Quote I'd like to see fleet boosting become a more common component of most fleeted ships, especially as battlecruisers aren't really suited to keep up with the kinds of fleets they are supposed to support, particularly with skirmish and info warfare links. Command ships could keep their bonuses and multi-link support to maintain their uniqueness in the subcap realm. I'd really like to see support frigates be able able to sport info or skirmish links, on grid, and only applying stacking limited bonuses to other frigate sized hulls in the same squad. Armor and shield warfare link bonuses should be limited (outside of command ships) to applying to ships of a smaller hull size. This would allow large ships to confer a defensive bonus on their escorts, and promote the use of mixed class fleets. People are upset about the weakness of battleships to bombs, but either their squishiness is diminished or their damage application rate goes up if they rely on smaller support ships to handle roles like scrambling and webbing targets. Small ship fleets don't have a whole lot of reason to rely on fire support from heavier ships in the current meta. One thing I would really like to see is transport focused hulls (haulers, DSTs, etc) be able to sport links specifically to support their escorts. Extended fleet hangar access range would also increase their utility tremendously. I think that is a totally reasonable proposition even for freighters. Allowing the pilot of the industrial ship being supported to directly shove ammo into the hangars of escort ships would be amazing, and certainly more interesting than twiddling one's thumbs or hoping something comes close enough to web. Stripping the remote capacitor transporter module from logi ships would be an interesting change, but I digress. These basic versions of offensive links should have fitting requirements in the range of a salvager (info) or a small smartbomb (skirmish). If they have small cumulative effects not dependent upon fleet booster role, the stacking rules should reflect the limit of bonusing only 10 other ships. Possibly, we have no need for changing the fitting requirements of the existing defensive links, limiting them to the current cruiser sized module, and perhaps including a battleship sized variant of seige or armored links. The new fleet support roles of capitals suggests a role in buffing the defenses of battleships,or junior capital ships. By the same token of limiting links, wing and fleet bonuses should be limited to on-grid effects, and links probably shouldn't propagate across multiple squads. Command ships might be a reasonable exception, but not across multiple wings.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1948	Posted - 2015.03.12 10:48:14 - [155] - Quote Warp/Agilty fit a T3 and it can keep up with AF's happily. Sure it doesn't have 300k EHP but it also doesn't need them when in a Frigate gang.
Irya Boone Never Surrender. 442	Posted - 2015.03.12 11:17:42 - [156] - Quote stop talking nonsense/BS Just ask ccp to to remove off grid boosting of the game for good ASAP. CCP it's time to remove Off Grid Boost and Put Them on Killmail too, add Logi on killmails .... Open that damn door !!
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 317	Posted - 2015.03.12 11:52:17 - [157] - Quote Oh God. For the hundredth time. CCP have said it can't be done until the code has been rewritten. It is a massive project and they don't want to give ETAs for it. Right now it would melt the servers, and even 10 people in system would be in TiDi. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Kallen Kozukie Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 15	Posted - 2015.03.12 12:04:08 - [158] - Quote It used to be the case you could set your links up in your comfy pos. They took that away at least. Which is a change i agreed with. Removing OGB though seems a bit excessive as its probably only the "have nots" as it were complaining about it, no one is forcing you to run a second account for a booster pilot, and even if you did, its not like the ships are ever truly safe anyway, can always be probed down, caught at gates, accidently left uncloaked somewhere, point is there is risk there. If its a huge issue, why not either A: train into command ships and provide your own links, or B: recruit someone else to do it. Then your gang can have your own shiny links which are better than a t3 booster. I would argue that links make a lot of things possible that were not before, ive lost count of the number of times my group has engaged a numericly superior opponent and won just from the advantages links give you. These same fights would have been suicide otherwise, and even finding a fight is hard unless an opponent gang feels they have some form of percieved advantage, such as numbers, tank or dps superiority, the same groups wouldnt have stuck around if we had a similar size gang, contrary to popular belief, no one wants fair fights in EVE, they just want fights they can win.
Gully Alex Foyle Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop 3731	Posted - 2015.03.12 13:54:59 - [159] - Quote I'm not a fan of off-grid boosts for two reasons: 1. The mechanic is uninteresting. It's a simple flat +% to stats with no direct choices/drawbacks, except the effort to dual-box the booster (see point 2). Fitting ships is an art, implants you have to choose and can only change once every 20h or so, etc. 2. Nobody really 'flies' link ships because it would be boring as hell I'd have no issue with links being completely removed. For now, I'm training a link alt too though I'll probably use her sparringly because :effort: Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Khan Wrenth Hedion University Amarr Empire 117	Posted - 2015.03.12 15:51:27 - [160] - Quote Altrue wrote: The end of Off grid boosting will make EVE PvP a bit worse. What do you think? That EVE Players engage in fights they think the ennemi can win?? EVE Players engage when they think they will win. Off Grid Boosting allows that extra unexpected edge to defeat your opponents in a seemingly unbalanced engagement. Removing it would seriously impair solo PvP. Besides, both sides can do Off Grid Boosting. There is literally nothing more balanced than that. A perfectly symetrical mecanic. Go ahead and bring your booster on-grid! Now exposed to a multitude of new threats, you have to dedicate a human player to play it instead of using an alt... Except that boosters are flying bricks, there is literally nothing more boring to fly Good job, you've just made EVE PVP worse and you've created an extremely boring role, mandatory in every serious fleet. Really, what a brilliant idea. Actually this is the strongest argument for removing links and boosts from the game entirely. You are right, nobody wants to fly as the link ship. So all it ends up being is someone pays CCP extra money in the form of a subscription in order to have an edge in the fight, or even the odds. It's like that scene in South Park where one of the cripple kids takes steroids and he rationalizes "well everyone else does it, this just gets me on the same playing field". If everyone has to do it, then what's the advantage? The advantage of shelling out extra money or grinding for extra isk/plex every month to maintain a level playing field? This doesn't sound like the full depth of playing of choices. This is like clone cost upgrades, there is no real choice being made here. So, CCP made this "Pay for advantage" system where someone has the responsibility of shelling out extra cash for an alt to sit there and idle. And what...if the guy who has the alt leaves your corp, who gets that responsibility now? Do you draw straws? Who in your corp should burden this responsibility? Should every person have one, just in case someone else leaves and takes their booster alt with them? Should every CCP customer be pressured into maintaining a second account to use for boosts? People beat around the bush, but this is the essence of the problem right here. If it's not a real player in that ship making choices and participating in the game, then it's nothing more than a way for CCP to sell more plex. Make it a fleet role that is feasible and fun to be a part of, like logi, and most problems go away. People complain about not having a booster alt DO have every opportunity to have one, but the reason they're complaining is that it doesn't add gameplay value when they do. They just shell out extra money to even a playing field. You could force links to be issued via friendly locks like logi, and reduce the chance of those ships being primaried by scaling back their boosts so the advantage they bring isn't overwhelming. Then it becomes a choice as to whether or not to primary them, because they aren't your biggest problem anymore. It becomes a choice as to whether or not to bring a link ship or another type, because the help is marginal. Suddenly these things become real choices and not just a default "yes". But that's just a quick and fleeting idea, not to be taken seriously. My main point is that CCP made links in a way that's bad for the game because it boils down to fleecing customers for a few extra bucks to even up the odds against richer (isk-wise, who can afford to plex a second account) opponents. That all said, if CCP doesn't remove links, I really won't care either. They haven't been used against me, and I suspect if I find myself in a PvP position, someone will inevitably bring them for my side, so whatever, it evens out. My annoyance is with it not being a fleet role and just a paid advantage, not that it may or may not provide a lopsided advantage in any past or future fight. I like that. I think the concept is great, I just want a real human at the keyboard. HTFU.-á Adapt or die.-á Beware the falcon punch.

Sibyyl Gallente Federation 23878	Posted - 2015.03.12 16:02:22 - [161] - Quote Put OGBs in killmails. We'll be able to correlate OGB alts with their mains and make smarter decisions about probing down the OGB and killing them before engaging the main. Let the players solve this problem instead of changing the mechanic. Sleep all day. Party all night. Never grow old. Never die. -óß¦ªß¦ç-ó
Demerius Xenocratus Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation 138	Posted - 2015.03.12 16:25:58 - [162] - Quote FT Cold wrote: For all of the people who believe that boosters are 100% safe, you can check out my KB. They're 100% safe if you aren't completely ********. Combat probes on dscan is kindof hard to miss.
Brutus Utama Fusion Enterprises Ltd Shadow of xXDEATHXx 8	Posted - 2015.03.12 16:44:34 - [163] - Quote March rabbit wrote: i have seen this in many small games: you can pay real money for next level or some stuff you can but lazy to get with ingame means. Why not make it in Eve? Let's say i want to kill this particular pilot/ship. I just too lazy to do it. I select it in overview, press button 'pay for kill' and BOOM! Money paid, killmail is ready and pilot goes to cloning facility. Stupid you say? Why? This is Eve: nothing needs to be fair game. You want to be 'competitive'? Just use whatever you can to get upper hand. You are paying for second account with booster to get 'solo' kills? Ok. You pay real money for special button to get the same kill? Ok too. WORST IDEA EVER.... Anyway onto my thoughts.... using a link ship is a risk too that ship + pod probably isnt cheap and it has about as much tank as a well tanked frig.... yes they give an advantage but everyone is able to use that advantage.... but its also a disadvantage to have that ship in system if someone is able to tackle it it cant really defend it self and then thats alot of isk down the drain.... so by removing off grid boosts you also want every miner to have an orca on grid with him? because that would be ridiculous...
Chance Ravinne WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 124	Posted - 2015.03.12 16:45:45 - [164] - Quote I can guarantee if OGB wasn't in the game, and CCP tried to add it in now, eh ere would be a riot. Imagine if CCP announced a new ship type that provided additional OGBs that stacked with existing ones. You think the Eve community would take kindly to it? You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
Gully Alex Foyle Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop 3733	Posted - 2015.03.12 16:47:17 - [165] - Quote Chance Ravinne wrote: I can guarantee if OGB wasn't in the game, and CCP tried to add it in now, eh ere would be a riot. Imagine if CCP announced a new ship type that provided additional OGBs that stacked with existing ones. You think the Eve community would take kindly to it? No need to imagine, mate. They will be called SuperFozzieCapitals. Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Val'Dore PlanetCorp InterStellar 943	Posted - 2015.03.12 17:01:49 - [166] - Quote OGB is akin to docbuffs in SWG were... they were required for participation. Star Jump Drive A new way to traverse the galaxy. I invented Tiericide
Elyia Suze Nagala Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 8	Posted - 2015.03.12 17:30:03 - [167] - Quote Anyone here if this thing call combat probes. I'm pretty sure there can scan down your problem OGB'ers. If they have to warp off then all the sudden they can't boost anymore. Am I correct here? Either way I don't care, I never run in to issues of these types. Either way Eve is fine, stop you bi**hin and adapt or die.
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 28	Posted - 2015.03.12 18:35:43 - [168] - Quote Scipio Artelius wrote: Aside from that, different perspectives can all be true. There is no single one truth that rules them all. My points weren't wrong in the same way yours aren't. So no need to try again. You see it only from one side. I also understand that side, but push a different view which is equally as valid, because a broader perspective on these things is always good. Links allow smaller gangs to take on larger gangs that they otherwise wouldn't consider. Each ship in the fleet gains equal benefit from the links, but by taking on a larger fleet, the incoming DPS is greater, not less. That's also simple math. I understand your perspective, but in this whole discussion you haven't acknowledged even once, the possibility that links actually benefit small gangs, only that they hurt them. It's not the full picture, because it's skewed to a single view. No. I'm sorry but imo that's realtivistic hooey based on flawed logic. Ogb is a zero sum game, If everybody has them noone benefits ( although admittedly that's kind of a simplification aswell). Small gangs only benefit if the larger gang doesn't have them. For reasons mentioned in my earlier post larger gangs will tendentially a) be more likely to have them b) have command ship links instead of inferior t3 links when in their own space c) be more likely able to intercept enemy boosting. On top of that full skirmish links make short work of the most viable tactics when facing a superior force. Thus the concept of links in general favors larger gangs over smaller gangs and is especially harmful to guerilla warfare. The misconception that links favor small gang pvp is imo based on a spurious correllation. Small scale pvp is for numerous reasons tendentially done by more well established "leet pvpers" who are more likely to have a link alt. As soon as almost everybody has them it will become more apparant how ogb truly shapes the pvp landscape. I'll give you an example: After my eve break i roamed the same systems i used to. The only difference is that the locals have become almost completely stationary when they have a command ship in system. On numerous occasions they didn't even chase my kiting frig out of their ogb sphere when they literally had everything (hyena, ecm) at the gate to make short work of it.
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 28	Posted - 2015.03.12 18:42:20 - [169] - Quote Just my two isk on the "Ogb's are fine since everybody can have them, adapt or die" Argument: Casuals and solo players are still the majority of the eve playerbase as far as i know. These players just might not have the time/money/willingnes to make a very complex game more dificult/expensive/time intensive to play. They want to log in and have some pvp action without being penalized any further (they will still have less practice. less isk and less friends) for not being a fulltime evenerd who runs multiple accounts. They want to login, roam freely and have some fun and they don't want to carry around a ridiculous booster to play the game at the same level as others. How do I know? Call it human intuition. Who wants to carry that booster around or be bound to that station hugging claymore like a dog at his kennel anyway? People like their stat boost but the mechanic itself is hideous and terrible and when the stat boost gets diminished because ogb is a zero sum game and because the victims of ogb-leetnes will either withdraw from pvp/eve in general or start running boosters themselves all that remains will be the uglyness of that mechanic.
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 28	Posted - 2015.03.12 18:47:30 - [170] - Quote double post. nvm

maCH'EttE Mafia Redux Feign Disorder 159	Posted - 2015.03.12 18:49:25 - [171] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Just my two isk on the "Ogb's are fine since everybody can have them, adapt or die" Argument: Casuals and solo players are still the majority of the eve playerbase as far as i know. These players just might not have the time/money/willingnes to make a very complex game more dificult/expensive/time intensive to play. They want to log in and have some pvp action without being penalized any further (they will still have less practice. less isk and less friends) for not being a fulltime evenerd who runs multiple accounts. They want to login, roam freely and have some fun and they don't want to carry around a ridiculous booster to play the game at the same level as others. How do I know? Call it human intuition. Who wants to carry that booster around or be bound to that station hugging claymore like a dog at his kennel anyway? People like their stat boost but the mechanic itself is hideous and terrible and when the stat boost gets diminished because ogb is a zero sum game and because the victims of ogb-leetnes will either withdraw from pvp/eve in general or start running boosters themselves all that remains will be the uglyness of that mechanic. Some people might call you delusional, i am calling a ******. You are taking your notions and thoughts and applying it for a group of people, when you are not one. OGB are not invincible, you can scan them with ease. So your argument holds no value, really it does not.
Kallen Kozukie Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 15	Posted - 2015.03.12 18:50:43 - [172] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Just my two isk on the "Ogb's are fine since everybody can have them, adapt or die" Argument: Casuals and solo players are still the majority of the eve playerbase as far as i know. These players just might not have the time/money/willingnes to make a very complex game more dificult/expensive/time intensive to play. They want to log in and have some pvp action without being penalized any further (they will still have less practice. less isk and less friends) for not being a fulltime evenerd who runs multiple accounts. They want to login, roam freely and have some fun and they don't want to carry around a ridiculous booster to play the game at the same level as others. How do I know? Call it human intuition. Who wants to carry that booster around or be bound to that station hugging claymore like a dog at his kennel anyway? People like their stat boost but the mechanic itself is hideous and terrible and when the stat boost gets diminished because ogb is a zero sum game and because the victims of ogb-leetnes will either withdraw from pvp/eve in general or start running boosters themselves all that remains will be the uglyness of that mechanic. I dont see how anyone elses unwillingness is anyone elses problem but thier own, the option is there to use them, or even field a few choice links in a combat capable command ship. The option not to use them is there as well. Ship choice and fittings still play a major role even if both gangs have identical links. so again, what is the issue here. because all i see here is "I cant/dont want to have a 2nd account for boosting" Well thats fantastic, for you, however it does not mean the rest of us need to not have a booster, because you choose not to. As stated earlier, small gangs have a hard time finding fights unless they are either outnumbered or outgunned, usually both. Links help close that gap, and retain the ability to find a fight if hidden well.
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 30	Posted - 2015.03.12 19:02:07 - [173] - Quote Kallen Kozukie wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: Just my two isk on the "Ogb's are fine since everybody can have them, adapt or die" Argument: Casuals and solo players are still the majority of the eve playerbase as far as i know. These players just might not have the time/money/willingnes to make a very complex game more dificult/expensive/time intensive to play. They want to log in and have some pvp action without being penalized any further (they will still have less practice. less isk and less friends) for not being a fulltime evenerd who runs multiple accounts. They want to login, roam freely and have some fun and they don't want to carry around a ridiculous booster to play the game at the same level as others. How do I know? Call it human intuition. Who wants to carry that booster around or be bound to that station hugging claymore like a dog at his kennel anyway? People like their stat boost but the mechanic itself is hideous and terrible and when the stat boost gets diminished because ogb is a zero sum game and because the victims of ogb-leetnes will either withdraw from pvp/eve in general or start running boosters themselves all that remains will be the uglyness of that mechanic. I dont see how anyone elses unwillingness is anyone elses problem but thier own, the option is there to use them, or even field a few choice links in a combat capable command ship. The option not to use them is there as well. Ship choice and fittings still play a major role even if both gangs have identical links. so again, what is the issue here. because all i see here is "I cant/dont want to have a 2nd account for boosting" Well thats fantastic, for you, however it does not mean the rest of us need to not have a booster, because you choose not to. As stated earlier, small gangs have a hard time finding fights unless they are either outnumbered or outgunned, usually both. Links help close that gap, and retain the ability to find a fight if hidden well. You can see it that way but wouldn't it be actually better to get rid of a bad mechanic which does very little to enhance gameplay but hurts accessability by a whole lot? Eve is a complex game and that's what great about it but links add very little to that complexity but increase the barrier to actually play it for casuals by a whole lot. imo that's just not a good idea. You can turn this whole thing into a discourse about free will but at the end of the day 40k players are better than 25k. Wouldn't you agree? The notion that links help small gangs is imo a total misconception as i tried to argue earlier.
maCH'EttE Mafia Redux Feign Disorder 159	Posted - 2015.03.12 19:05:24 - [174] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Kallen Kozukie wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: Just my two isk on the "Ogb's are fine since everybody can have them, adapt or die" Argument: Casuals and solo players are still the majority of the eve playerbase as far as i know. These players just might not have the time/money/willingnes to make a very complex game more dificult/expensive/time intensive to play. They want to log in and have some pvp action without being penalized any further (they will still have less practice. less isk and less friends) for not being a fulltime evenerd who runs multiple accounts. They want to login, roam freely and have some fun and they don't want to carry around a ridiculous booster to play the game at the same level as others. How do I know? Call it human intuition. Who wants to carry that booster around or be bound to that station hugging claymore like a dog at his kennel anyway? People like their stat boost but the mechanic itself is hideous and terrible and when the stat boost gets diminished because ogb is a zero sum game and because the victims of ogb-leetnes will either withdraw from pvp/eve in general or start running boosters themselves all that remains will be the uglyness of that mechanic. I dont see how anyone elses unwillingness is anyone elses problem but thier own, the option is there to use them, or even field a few choice links in a combat capable command ship. The option not to use them is there as well. Ship choice and fittings still play a major role even if both gangs have identical links. so again, what is the issue here. because all i see here is "I cant/dont want to have a 2nd account for boosting" Well thats fantastic, for you, however it does not mean the rest of us need to not have a booster, because you choose not to. As stated earlier, small gangs have a hard time finding fights unless they are either outnumbered or outgunned, usually both. Links help close that gap, and retain the ability to find a fight if hidden well. You can see it that way but wouldn't it be actually better to get rid of a bad mechanic which does very little to enhance gameplay but hurts accessability by a whole lot? Eve is a complex game and that's what great about it but links add very little to that complexity but increase the barrier to actually play it for casuals by a whole lot. imo that's just not a good idea. You can turn this whole thing into a discourse about free will but at the end of the day 40k players are better than 25k. Wouldn't you agree? The notion that links help small gangs is imo a total misconception as i tried to argue earlier. You are just a f'en troll and this thead should be never posted again.
Kallen Kozukie Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 15	Posted - 2015.03.12 19:11:03 - [175] - Quote The change to boosting inside a pos was enough imo, it used to be the case you could sit in your cereal box fortress and boost all day, now THAT was broken, now at least the ships are out on the field, where they can be blapped. You say that it dosn't add anything to the game, the vast majority of us disagree with you. It is completely counterable in fact if you are watchful and know how to probe. The extra speed, range etc are essential for some types of gameplay, now just because you dont feel it fits in your vision of the sandbox, does not make it ok to demonize them for your lack of willingness to use them. To turn your own argument against you, 25k players is indeed less than 40k, but of those 25k how many do you think are rolling around looking for solo pvp gudfights. I promise you the answer is less than you think. i encounter gangs all the time that do not have links, at all, some dont even know what combat probes even are. some use them religiously. But the operative word in all of it is gang, IE: more than one person. Eve is not a single player game, despite how many carebears and soloists wish it to be so, even without links, that 40 man gate camp is still going to wreck your face regardless.
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 31	Posted - 2015.03.12 19:38:00 - [176] - Quote Kallen Kozukie wrote: The change to boosting inside a pos was enough imo, it used to be the case you could sit in your cereal box fortress and boost all day, now THAT was broken, now at least the ships are out on the field, where they can be blapped. You say that it dosn't add anything to the game, the vast majority of us disagree with you. It is completely counterable in fact if you are watchful and know how to probe. The extra speed, range etc are essential for some types of gameplay, now just because you dont feel it fits in your vision of the sandbox, does not make it ok to demonize them for your lack of willingness to use them. To turn your own argument against you, 25k players is indeed less than 40k, but of those 25k how many do you think are rolling around looking for solo pvp gudfights. I promise you the answer is less than you think. i encounter gangs all the time that do not have links, at all, some dont even know what combat probes even are. some use them religiously. But the operative word in all of it is gang, IE: more than one person. Eve is not a single player game, despite how many carebears and soloists wish it to be so, even without links, that 40 man gate camp is still going to wreck your face regardless. They are not completely counterable. For small gangs they are not counterable at all for the most time. Think about it. Even if one of the three pilots of a hypothetical 3-ship small gang is willing to play the role of flying a bonused probing hull instead of a combat ship (oh joy!) he will be comepletely out of luck in lowsec (boosters hug stations and gates) and in nullsec the booster will just warp when he sees combat probes at 1au. or it will be well defended sitting at station or next to a pos. Furthermore having to run a dedicated prober and thus decreasing the gangs combat strenghts will work as a massive indirect debuff This has really all been dicsussed before. The argument that links are essential for anything is misleading imo. Myself being quite a bad pilot i'm still able to fight 1vsmany most of the time and have a lot of fun doing it. It's not that hard really. You can still fit a kiting gang that will work just fine but within the fitting boundaries of balanced hulls! Why do you think CCP balances stuff at all?The only situation where you really need links is when the enemy has them. The idea of needings links imo comes from the fact that players got used to bluntly doing things in pvp they shouldn't be able to do in the first place.
FT Cold Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 11	Posted - 2015.03.12 19:56:44 - [177] - Quote Demerius Xenocratus wrote: FT Cold wrote: For all of the people who believe that boosters are 100% safe, you can check out my KB. They're 100% safe if you aren't completely ********. Combat probes on dscan is kindof hard to miss. If they're forced to cloak or warp off then the links are down. OP success. Otherwise, if they don't press dscan for 20 seconds, I get a shiny killmail.
Lloyd Roses 901	Posted - 2015.03.12 20:14:17 - [178] - Quote Sibyyl wrote: Put OGBs in killmails. We'll be able to correlate OGB alts with their mains and make smarter decisions about probing down the OGB and killing them before engaging the main. Let the players solve this problem instead of changing the mechanic. Put logistics in there aswell and you got a deal! I GÖÑ Sleipnir
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34729	Posted - 2015.03.12 20:50:54 - [179] - Quote maCH'EttE wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: You can see it that way but wouldn't it be actually better to get rid of a bad mechanic which does very little to enhance gameplay but hurts accessability by a whole lot? Eve is a complex game and that's what great about it but links add very little to that complexity but increase the barrier to actually play it for casuals by a whole lot. imo that's just not a good idea. You can turn this whole thing into a discourse about free will but at the end of the day 40k players are better than 25k. Wouldn't you agree? The notion that links help small gangs is imo a total misconception as i tried to argue earlier. You are just a f'en troll and this thead should be never posted again. Not empty quoting. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Faenir Antollare University of Caille Gallente Federation 366	Posted - 2015.03.12 20:53:20 - [180] - Quote So many words, yet now just two still suffice.. combat probes. RiP BooBoo 26/7/1971 - 23/7/2014 My Lady My Love My Life My Wife

Alavaria Fera GoonWaffe 6620	Posted - 2015.03.12 22:19:20 - [181] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: Sibyyl wrote: Put OGBs in killmails. We'll be able to correlate OGB alts with their mains and make smarter decisions about probing down the OGB and killing them before engaging the main. Let the players solve this problem instead of changing the mechanic. Put logistics in there aswell and you got a deal! We might as well with "full disclosure"mails. ^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears. Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
Unezka Turigahl Det Som Engang Var 630	Posted - 2015.03.12 22:23:56 - [182] - Quote Val'Dore wrote: OGB is akin to docbuffs in SWG were... they were required for participation. This is how things ended up in Asheron's Call also. All players started using a full set of clothing buffs, resistance buffs, and attribute buffs. So the devs developed all the new PvE content balanced with that in mind. So if you wanted to do PvE, you needed to have all buffs, and you had to rebuff every 30 minutes. And if you wanted to do PvP you needed them as well or you stood no chance. Net effect = giant PITA and lots of down time. No fun at all. EVE is nowhere near as bad as this of course. But you can already see some areas of PvE where boosts have become pretty much mandatory due to the min-maxing of the players - hisec incursions for example. People keep mentioning combat probes. What am I supposed to do in hisec? Against say... a player who has an OGB alt and steals my loot in an exploration site? I can't probe their OGB and kill it in hisec. Must I have an OGB alt too then? Or do I need to start running sites with 2x DPS characters to overpower them before they can make full use of their OGB? EVE already has its running joke of "30k accounts online = 15k actual players online". We don't need more alts. Then there is the actual gameplay of the boosting character. A Command Ship fit for fighting on grid while running one link may be fun. But players love to min-max, so boosting ships usually end up good at boosting and nothing else. This makes them only acceptable as alts. So... how about a compromise? Only one link allowed on a boosting ship, your sig radius blows up like a MWD when you're running it, and you can't use boosts in hisec.
Gully Alex Foyle Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop 3735	Posted - 2015.03.12 22:26:05 - [183] - Quote Alavaria Fera wrote: Lloyd Roses wrote: Sibyyl wrote: Put OGBs in killmails. We'll be able to correlate OGB alts with their mains and make smarter decisions about probing down the OGB and killing them before engaging the main. Let the players solve this problem instead of changing the mechanic. Put logistics in there aswell and you got a deal! We might as well with "full disclosure"mails. I want wife aggro shown on killmails. Would have top Battleclinic rank, along with alcohol. Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Unezka Turigahl Det Som Engang Var 630	Posted - 2015.03.12 22:37:13 - [184] - Quote Unezka Turigahl wrote: your sig radius blows up like a MWD when you're running it Hmm... I wonder... what if every active link gives you +100 to your signature radius? This would make you easier to scan down the more links you have running. Would this alone be enough to force OGB alts into becoming on-grid mains? Choosing to run only 1 or 2 links along with a rack of guns/missiles? But yeah, still need to be banned from hisec.
Felicity Love Imperium Galactic Navy 2216	Posted - 2015.03.12 22:44:48 - [185] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: I recently bought this toon and returned to EVE after a break due to rl obligations and I was shocked to see that ogb was not only still around but that it has spread like a desease and infested most of lowsec and nullsec even. Stay tuned on this and other topics, AKA: copious volumes of fecal matter about to impact the rotary atmospheric agitator at a Fanfest near you. "EVE is dying." -- The Four Forum Trolls of the Apocalypse.-á-á ( Pick four, any four. They all smell. -á)
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34738	Posted - 2015.03.12 22:55:00 - [186] - Quote Unezka Turigahl wrote: Hmm... I wonder... what if every active link gives you +100 to your signature radius? This would make you easier to scan down the more links you have running. Would this alone be enough to force OGB alts into becoming on-grid mains? Choosing to run only 1 or 2 links along with a rack of guns/missiles? No, it wouldn't be enough on it's own. In lowsec a lot of people already sit their links alts on stations and gates. They usually don't have a lot of tank (if T3), but if you shoot them you draw sentry gun fire. Increasing their sig radius will just put more of them on gates and stations. That can be easily dealt with by aligning, shooting, warping off and then back again. If they are still there, kill them. But if the player is alert, they'll just move the ship anyway. But it does nothing for highsec and only makes a difference in nullsec. Combat probes are good in nullsec, less useful in lowsec because the links ships are relatively easy to find and only useful in highsec if you are willing to suicide gank and the links ship is not on a station (which it most probably is). We usually send an alt in a rookie ship to shoot the links ship (lowsec roams). When engaged in a fight, the links pilot often doesn't even notice it's just a rookie ship and instantly docks or jumps. Sometimes half their fleet warps to try to protect the links, separating their ships. Doesn't always work, but it works enough to be useful for us. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Irya Boone Never Surrender. 444	Posted - 2015.03.13 01:07:54 - [187] - Quote or we can actually make links an active module >> no auto repeat and very very short cycle no need ti rewrite massive code etc etc just change the attribute of links and put booster on Km too :) CCP it's time to remove Off Grid Boost and Put Them on Killmail too, add Logi on killmails .... Open that damn door !!
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1948	Posted - 2015.03.13 01:34:27 - [188] - Quote Unezka Turigahl wrote: Hmm... I wonder... what if every active link gives you +100 to your signature radius? This would make you easier to scan down the more links you have running. Would this alone be enough to force OGB alts into becoming on-grid mains? Choosing to run only 1 or 2 links along with a rack of guns/missiles? But yeah, still need to be banned from hisec. As mentioned earlier in the thread, congratulations, you have now killed on grid links. Because you have just bloated on grid link sigs making them vastly easier to kill and lock. Also there is no reason to ban links from High Sec. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to use links in high sec, just the situation of the neutral OGB needs addressing is all. Lastly making them not auto cycle is not engaging gameplay. Try doing an hour of gameplay with your guns auto cycle turned off and see how enjoyable it is.
kraken11 jensen The Gallant Collective Requiem Eternal 77	Posted - 2015.03.13 09:10:55 - [189] - Quote Implants=boost Links=boost Drugs=boost More sp combat wise = boost (an advantage) . Just an part off eve, eve is not fair. ''solo pvp'' ehm, don't expect it to be. lol, Btw, did you guys check FT cold 's kill board? he got some really nice kills there :) Just look https://zkillboard.com/character/743107009/ (quite a lot off link kills in an relatively short amount off time) Also, it don't make you bad using the things that can give you an advantage, I suppose you embrace (aspects) ? the tools / items /things that can help you.
tiberiusric Comply Or Die Retribution. 198	Posted - 2015.03.13 11:23:56 - [190] - Quote you know another terrible mechanic - drag bubbles... just saying..

Scira Crimson No Tax No 0	Posted - 2015.03.13 14:12:30 - [191] - Quote Quote: Why do I need links? I don't particularly. It's a game mechanic that is available, so I choose to use it. There is nothing wrong in doing so and it's nothing about boosting my stats. Thats bad logic. Unfortunatly you see a lot of this on many game forums You can not justify a bad game mechanic because its in the game (if a player abuses a broken game mechanics, its the developers fault) Ogb definitly needs to go, this is 100% obvious. Only people who take advantage of it are against it. lol Imo Eve online encourages multiaccounting too much. I might probably be a minority with this opinion and I also use an alt(on same account) but for me its fundamentally wrong to encourage multiaccounting in an MMO. Because its contradictionary. A MMO should(!) be meant to played by DIFFERENT people and not by 1 with 20 accounts. I mean, WTF is this?!? How can you even think thats good in any case? I dont ask for hunting down multiboxers with fire and sword, but it should be at least be discouraged to do so. And OGB is exactly the opposite. Yes, its probably economical reasonable to allow and even encourage multiaccounts but in the long run it will turn out bad. What if one dayit turns out that only 10000 of online 40000 people are real player? You have to understand, that a low "effective playerbase" also means less promotion. One heavy multiboxer might bring in a decent amount of Gé¼ but if he quits (and he will one day) the number of "player" will decrease significantly. Therefore: 1 person = 1 account = 1 character = maximum game integrety Ofc it will be a constant struggle to enforce this and the game will not "break" if there are some people multiboxing, ofg, alting etc, but it should be a GOAL(!) to get rid of such things. And as I read that CCP is just unable to get rid of ogb I am actually fine with the situation. (I would be really mad if they say its ok and good game design) If something does not work as it should its no problem as long as a game company does not follow obnoxious design policies.
Dun'Gal Myriad Contractors Inc. 207	Posted - 2015.03.13 14:22:35 - [192] - Quote Brutus Utama wrote: so by removing off grid boosts you also want every miner to have an orca on grid with him? because that would be ridiculous... Are the belts over crowded or something? I fail to see what's ridiculous for a ship (the orca) which is designed to not only boost fleets but haul the ore they mine/the ships to mine said ore with, be on grid with there mining fleet. That sounds like precisely where it was designed to/should be? As to off grid warfare links, they are a plague that deserves to be removed entirely - however until such time as this happens people need to stop whining about them and just deal with it. They exist, they are annoying, but it's not the end of the world. @ All the OGB users out there who continue to argue that they use/need them because others use/need them, therefore they are needed/shouldn't be removed, etc. It is completely asinine to believe that is even remotely a relevant reason to keep them in game, and the frequency of that argument makes my head hurt. The vast majority of the OGB users I run into are not only terrible, and lose a hell of a lot more fights than they really should, but will rarely take fights even when they have the obvious advantage (not just referring to the links, but numerical as well.) Meanwhile the rest (the minority,) of OGB users, have sufficient knowledge, and player skill that they don't need the OGB's but are so used to them, that it has become a crutch they can't do without. I've heard some very talented players (whom I met before they had there very own shiny OGB's) that would at one point jump at a "good fight" without the OGB's, cringe at the thought of taking the same fight it without there OGB's. Or, in the absence of, would now simply upship to the point where the people they are trying to get a "good fight" from just look at them and wisely bugger off. I've come to think of it as reverse blue balling. It sounds painful, and I can't think of any reason to do this to yourself other than exactly what people keep saying about link users, they have indeed become the risk averse scrubs they so loathe. A final PS - please, don't try and blah blah about the risk involved when fighting vastly outnumbered therefore you need links, most of you are flying kiting doctrines in these cases and frankly the risk is basically zero unless you do something stupid, like stop moving.
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 32	Posted - 2015.03.13 15:56:36 - [193] - Quote Dun'Gal wrote: Brutus Utama wrote: so by removing off grid boosts you also want every miner to have an orca on grid with him? because that would be ridiculous... Are the belts over crowded or something? I fail to see what's ridiculous for a ship (the orca) which is designed to not only boost fleets but haul the ore they mine/the ships to mine said ore with, be on grid with there mining fleet. That sounds like precisely where it was designed to/should be? As to off grid warfare links, they are a plague that deserves to be removed entirely - however until such time as this happens people need to stop whining about them and just deal with it. They exist, they are annoying, but it's not the end of the world. @ All the OGB users out there who continue to argue that they use/need them because others use/need them, therefore they are needed/shouldn't be removed, etc. It is completely asinine to believe that is even remotely a relevant reason to keep them in game, and the frequency of that argument makes my head hurt. The vast majority of the OGB users I run into are not only terrible, and lose a hell of a lot more fights than they really should, but will rarely take fights even when they have the obvious advantage (not just referring to the links, but numerical as well.) Meanwhile the rest (the minority,) of OGB users, have sufficient knowledge, and player skill that they don't need the OGB's but are so used to them, that it has become a crutch they can't do without. I've heard some very talented players (whom I met before they had there very own shiny OGB's) that would at one point jump at a "good fight" without the OGB's, cringe at the thought of taking the same fight it without there OGB's. Or, in the absence of, would now simply upship to the point where the people they are trying to get a "good fight" from just look at them and wisely bugger off. I've come to think of it as reverse blue balling. It sounds painful, and I can't think of any reason to do this to yourself other than exactly what people keep saying about link users, they have indeed become the risk averse scrubs they so loathe. A final PS - please, don't try and blah blah about the risk involved when fighting vastly outnumbered therefore you need links, most of you are flying kiting doctrines in these cases and frankly the risk is basically zero unless you do something stupid, like stop moving. That's the truth right there. I didn't want to make a big thing out of it but some players i used to fly with seem to have developed from roaming risk takers to stationary claymore leetnes. When you have been away for a while and see how links have changed the pvp pandscape it's sad really.
Chance Ravinne WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 125	Posted - 2015.03.13 20:08:00 - [194] - Quote Whoever compares OGB to boosters forgot two things. First, boosters have a chance of drawbacks and can affect your travel in empire space. Second, boosters don't rely on how many EVE clients you can run at once. You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34761	Posted - 2015.03.13 20:14:01 - [195] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Dun'Gal wrote: As to off grid warfare links, they ... deserves to be removed entirely - however until such time as this happens people need to stop whining about them and just deal with it. That's the truth right there. Finally. Halajulah. /thread Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Kamahl Daikun Back To Basics. 46	Posted - 2015.03.13 20:19:21 - [196] - Quote The only problem I see with OGB is that it's silently enforcing a standard. I played another game that did something similar - buffslaves. If you wanted to farm efficiently, you needed buffslaves. You didn't need to party with a buffing class because you had buffslaves. If you wanted to solo, buffslaves. They became mandatory for nearly every activity of the game and it became a huge problem for various reason. Eventually, the devs made the decision to disallow multi-clienting and buffslaves became a luxury of having more than 1 PC in the house but it didn't solve the problem. OGB obviously doesn't prevent certain hulls from joining fleets but it is enforcing a standard.
Hal Morsh Aliastra Gallente Federation 271	Posted - 2015.03.13 22:39:27 - [197] - Quote Kamahl Daikun wrote: The only problem I see with OGB is that it's silently enforcing a standard. I played another game that did something similar - buffslaves. If you wanted to farm efficiently, you needed buffslaves. You didn't need to party with a buffing class because you had buffslaves. If you wanted to solo, buffslaves. They became mandatory for nearly every activity of the game and it became a huge problem for various reason. Eventually, the devs made the decision to disallow multi-clienting and buffslaves became a luxury of having more than 1 PC in the house but it didn't solve the problem. OGB obviously doesn't prevent certain hulls from joining fleets but it is enforcing a standard. People usualy used their wifes characters for this in a game I played lol. Healers had whips and were purple. The class I played however was a combat class with unique buffs. It was cool because it gave you say 40 chances for damage to be guarded against every hit instead of a countdown timer. Problem with this is in a king of the hill type mode healers were with the parties, buffing healing and sometimes AOEing and freezing enemies. me? I was expected to stay at base and give every character of every party the buffs they requested as they ran by (defence and offence were restricted to one of each type active at a time, 2 in total) Meaning I either did as told or I didn't get a party and didn't get any points except for what I killed, and believe me when they have +9 armor and pay to win +10 rare weapons while I have just +6 stuff with few stats added..... The party is almost the only way I get points. To make matters worse those points were linked to rank ups that gave you a permanent stat boost forever. It's a game called dekaron that used to be ran by akklaim games (Yea those N64 guys) but now Nexon owns it, botting was no longer a problem but with pay to win and korea being many updates ahead I just left. I also don't like Nexons game "maplestory", the art style is just creepy to me. CCP - Outpost code is scary.
Alavaria Fera GoonWaffe 6648	Posted - 2015.03.13 23:12:02 - [198] - Quote Kamahl Daikun wrote: Eventually, the devs made the decision to disallow multi-clienting and buffslaves became a luxury of having more than 1 PC in the house but it didn't solve the problem. Ahaaaa. Coming back to the multi-clienting part of this might be interesting discussion... ^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears. Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
Nicolai Serkanner Jebediah Kerman's Junkyard and Spaceship Parts Co. Brave Collective 294	Posted - 2015.03.13 23:49:05 - [199] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: I recently bought this toon and returned to EVE after a break due to rl obligations and I was shocked to see that ogb was not only still around but that it has spread like a desease and infested most of lowsec and nullsec even. Before anyone calls me a whiner let me say this: I have much love for EVE as a game and even though i don't have much time to play it I will probably keep my accounts subbed until tranquility shuts down.I'm not a "pro" and I don't care for kb stats but i do care for good fights which way too often simply get ruined by off grid boosted undercover super ships! Wasn't this supposed to be dealt with a long time ago!? Why do you even bother balancing hulls if you're allowing a condor being turned into a garmur from off grid without any notable risk?! The arguments for getting rid of this terrible mechanic are well known so I won't enumerate them again but seriously: CCP, get your stuff together! You guys know what a turn off ogb is for half of the pvp community, you know how it caters to a dumped down, tedious, slow and risk-averse playsyle that is literally poison to pvp as a whole! If the dogma rewrite still takes time give us something in the meantime! This bullshit mechanic has been around for way too long and not everybody is enough of an eve fanboy to endure your disregard in that respect.CCP, do something! Obligatory, learn how to play the game.
Kiandoshia Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance 2233	Posted - 2015.03.14 00:37:25 - [200] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Mr Epeen wrote: Both fleets in an engagement can use OGB. I find it difficult to see the 'risk free advantage' here. Mr Epeen You're missing the point. Not everybody is willing or able to run a booster. There is problem. Become willing and able. Problem is no more. Eve 101 :D

Aston Martin DB5 Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 57	Posted - 2015.03.14 02:44:13 - [201] - Quote Having the bonuses rock but I will say this: I would love for their roll to be on the battlefield (pve or pvp) even if it means they must target the ships for the bonuses with max range 100km. Be creative and make new high slot modules? Make them similar to logi pilots or link up with them on the battlefield similar to how cap transfer work with Amarr logi? Who knows... but I don't like afk boosting - just the buffs haha
kraken11 jensen The Gallant Collective Requiem Eternal 79	Posted - 2015.03.14 06:00:44 - [202] - Quote Aston Martin DB5 wrote: Having the bonuses rock but I will say this: I would love for their roll to be on the battlefield (pve or pvp) even if it means they must target the ships for the bonuses with max range 100km. Be creative and make new high slot modules? Make them similar to logi pilots or link up with them on the battlefield similar to how cap transfer work with Amarr logi? Who knows... but I don't like afk boosting - just the buffs haha Afk boosting= Scan down = Kill Booster = Hah. So, why you don't like it? :P
Rroff Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 950	Posted - 2015.03.14 12:35:22 - [203] - Quote TBH most people who use links as a gross generalisation try to use every tool available to get themselves an edge and the people complaining want the same results without having to go to half the efforts and if/when OGBs go will move straight onto whining about whatever else gives those players an edge.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 322	Posted - 2015.03.15 14:06:50 - [204] - Quote Can't believe this thread is still going! Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Buhhdust Princess Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships. 9095	Posted - 2015.03.15 23:07:55 - [205] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: I recently bought this toon and returned to EVE after a break due to rl obligations and I was shocked to see that ogb was not only still around but that it has spread like a desease and infested most of lowsec and nullsec even. Before anyone calls me a whiner let me say this: I have much love for EVE as a game and even though i don't have much time to play it I will probably keep my accounts subbed until tranquility shuts down.I'm not a "pro" and I don't care for kb stats but i do care for good fights which way too often simply get ruined by off grid boosted undercover super ships! Wasn't this supposed to be dealt with a long time ago!? Why do you even bother balancing hulls if you're allowing a condor being turned into a garmur from off grid without any notable risk?! The arguments for getting rid of this terrible mechanic are well known so I won't enumerate them again but seriously: CCP, get your stuff together! You guys know what a turn off ogb is for half of the pvp community, you know how it caters to a dumped down, tedious, slow and risk-averse playsyle that is literally poison to pvp as a whole! If the dogma rewrite still takes time give us something in the meantime! This bullshit mechanic has been around for way too long and not everybody is enough of an eve fanboy to endure your disregard in that respect.CCP, do something! Shut up and unsub again seriously... stop whining about things and get on with it. OGB is a thing and SHOULD remain a thing, it's the ONLY thing that allows soloers/small gangs to fight outnumbered and have fun anymore.
Mithandra Catastrophic Operations Nulli Secunda 238	Posted - 2015.03.16 12:09:26 - [206] - Quote Personally I think OGB should be removed. I have no fancy arguments, no witty comments, no disparaging remarks, and no anecdotal evidence to back up my position. Am I concerned about it remaining in game? Not really. Would I like to see it gone? Yup. Will I whine on the forums if it remains? Nope. Eve is the dark haired, totally hot emo gothchild of the gaming community
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 35	Posted - 2015.03.16 12:27:58 - [207] - Quote Buhhdust Princess wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: I recently bought this toon and returned to EVE after a break due to rl obligations and I was shocked to see that ogb was not only still around but that it has spread like a desease and infested most of lowsec and nullsec even. Before anyone calls me a whiner let me say this: I have much love for EVE as a game and even though i don't have much time to play it I will probably keep my accounts subbed until tranquility shuts down.I'm not a "pro" and I don't care for kb stats but i do care for good fights which way too often simply get ruined by off grid boosted undercover super ships! Wasn't this supposed to be dealt with a long time ago!? Why do you even bother balancing hulls if you're allowing a condor being turned into a garmur from off grid without any notable risk?! The arguments for getting rid of this terrible mechanic are well known so I won't enumerate them again but seriously: CCP, get your stuff together! You guys know what a turn off ogb is for half of the pvp community, you know how it caters to a dumped down, tedious, slow and risk-averse playsyle that is literally poison to pvp as a whole! If the dogma rewrite still takes time give us something in the meantime! This bullshit mechanic has been around for way too long and not everybody is enough of an eve fanboy to endure your disregard in that respect.CCP, do something! Shut up and unsub again seriously... stop whining about things and get on with it. OGB is a thing and SHOULD remain a thing, it's the ONLY thing that allows soloers/small gangs to fight outnumbered and have fun anymore. Read the Thread, will you? I specifically explained why boosts DON'T favor "soloers" and small gangs. They cater to larger stationary groups. Also: If you can't engage gangs without links you're just terrible at EVE. What really makes viable solo pvp tactics (kiting!) neigh impossible is when the enemy has skirmish links. You should also change your tone unless you like sounding like an egomaniac little brat.
knobber Jobbler Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 535	Posted - 2015.03.16 12:50:20 - [208] - Quote Buhhdust Princess wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: I recently bought this toon and returned to EVE after a break due to rl obligations and I was shocked to see that ogb was not only still around but that it has spread like a desease and infested most of lowsec and nullsec even. Before anyone calls me a whiner let me say this: I have much love for EVE as a game and even though i don't have much time to play it I will probably keep my accounts subbed until tranquility shuts down.I'm not a "pro" and I don't care for kb stats but i do care for good fights which way too often simply get ruined by off grid boosted undercover super ships! Wasn't this supposed to be dealt with a long time ago!? Why do you even bother balancing hulls if you're allowing a condor being turned into a garmur from off grid without any notable risk?! The arguments for getting rid of this terrible mechanic are well known so I won't enumerate them again but seriously: CCP, get your stuff together! You guys know what a turn off ogb is for half of the pvp community, you know how it caters to a dumped down, tedious, slow and risk-averse playsyle that is literally poison to pvp as a whole! If the dogma rewrite still takes time give us something in the meantime! This bullshit mechanic has been around for way too long and not everybody is enough of an eve fanboy to endure your disregard in that respect.CCP, do something! Shut up and unsub again seriously... stop whining about things and get on with it. OGB is a thing and SHOULD remain a thing, it's the ONLY thing that allows soloers/small gangs to fight outnumbered and have fun anymore. Both sides in a fight can bring them though, so your point is void.
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 35	Posted - 2015.03.16 13:03:02 - [209] - Quote knobber Jobbler wrote: Buhhdust Princess wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: I recently bought this toon and returned to EVE after a break due to rl obligations and I was shocked to see that ogb was not only still around but that it has spread like a desease and infested most of lowsec and nullsec even. Before anyone calls me a whiner let me say this: I have much love for EVE as a game and even though i don't have much time to play it I will probably keep my accounts subbed until tranquility shuts down.I'm not a "pro" and I don't care for kb stats but i do care for good fights which way too often simply get ruined by off grid boosted undercover super ships! Wasn't this supposed to be dealt with a long time ago!? Why do you even bother balancing hulls if you're allowing a condor being turned into a garmur from off grid without any notable risk?! The arguments for getting rid of this terrible mechanic are well known so I won't enumerate them again but seriously: CCP, get your stuff together! You guys know what a turn off ogb is for half of the pvp community, you know how it caters to a dumped down, tedious, slow and risk-averse playsyle that is literally poison to pvp as a whole! If the dogma rewrite still takes time give us something in the meantime! This bullshit mechanic has been around for way too long and not everybody is enough of an eve fanboy to endure your disregard in that respect.CCP, do something! Shut up and unsub again seriously... stop whining about things and get on with it. OGB is a thing and SHOULD remain a thing, it's the ONLY thing that allows soloers/small gangs to fight outnumbered and have fun anymore. Both sides in a fight can bring them though, so your point is void. exactly and on top of that: Larger and more stationary grups will be more likely to have links and to have better links! Tbh the whole "links allow us to engage larger gangs"-argument says something about the person making it. Specifically that he or she is not capable of understanding a game mechanic and its impact beyond the limited scope of their personal experience.
SmilingVagrant GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 2671	Posted - 2015.03.16 15:53:41 - [210] - Quote Gonna be honest this is right up there with AFK cloaking in the "Things I don't care about" department. If nothing else due to the afk nature of boosters it's quite fun to have someone with max probing/virtues out during a big fleet fight hunting them down and killing them. Just make it so the boosts can't be run within a pos. All major problems fixed.

Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 322	Posted - 2015.03.16 15:55:01 - [211] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: You should also change your tone unless you like sounding like an egomaniac little brat. You should have one of those reader things that read your own comments back to you before posting them. It may help out with serious problems with your own posts. And in other news. LINKS ARE NOT GOING ANYWHERE. CCP have said so. Again and Again. Get over yourselfs. And if i go to the effort of skilling up a links pilot, why shouldn't i get an advantage? If i go to the effort of having a scout, why should that be bad? Seems there is just a lot of butthurt for people that can't be bothered with getting links, or even worse hate the idea of losing any fight. If you want a perfectly even playing field, go play chess or Go. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
March rabbit Federal Defense Union 1559	Posted - 2015.03.16 15:59:11 - [212] - Quote Rroff wrote: TBH most people who use links as a gross generalisation try to use every tool available to get themselves an edge.... 'every tool available' should not mean: - second account for 'solo pvp' - hacker attack to TS or to server - other out of game mean The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Darth Virpio Caldari Provisions Caldari State 2	Posted - 2015.03.16 20:44:34 - [213] - Quote OGB ships are bad in my opinion, simply as they are way too effective for the amount of risk involved. Some suggestions would be: - Make boosts much weaker, with a boost (to the current level) if the ships are on grid with you. Probably difficult to code. - Change the boosts to effect different characteristics. I don't think it is the tank bonuses that really get people - Its the massive speed boost combined with the boost to web/scram range. Either remove speed and/or web/scram bonuses and leave the rest as is. Its the combination of these two which makes links OP for the investment - And before anyone says but everyone could have one, can I just say that ANY game mechanic which encourages a second account or an ability/willingness to multi-box (with the investment in PC and screens etc...) is fundamentally bad. Really bad. Anyone who refuses to see that very obvious point needs their head examined as a matter of urgency. - A new Hi Slot module that Jams links. Would be great if this could be fit as a hi slot module, but maybe more viable as a POS module - Similar to a Cyno Jammer - Just blocks all links in system when active. This would allow a legitimate counter to the OGB tactic. Simiar to fitting ECCM, tracking computers, sensor boosters etc... Lots of other options to look at, but the only bit that is clear from my experience of the game (and reading this thread) is that OGB in the current format are unhealthy, generally unwanted and need alterations. I doubt CCP will even consider removing OGB, just from the sheer number of accounts that would be immediately expired, but changing them in a way that makes them a smaller factor in a fight (or make them counterable) I think is viable.
Kathryn Painway Just a Ride 11	Posted - 2015.03.17 02:12:27 - [214] - Quote [quote= Ogb gives one half of pvpers a massive practically risk free advantage over the other half while dumpening down tactical depth in the process. It's the definition of a bad mechanic that messes with all the careful balancing and complexity that ccp has created. empire, lowsec, nullsec: doesn't matter, it's still a terrible mechanic![/quote] I am usually on the wrong side of that senario but have no problems with it, especially when OGB have to be uncloaked, and that's how you get yourself a nice T2 or 3 kill. Besides, it also allows for more versatile mining fleets
Sylveria Relden 86	Posted - 2015.03.17 02:20:16 - [215] - Quote OGB... really simple- don't wanna lose it? Don't field it. People like to talk a lot when it comes to "risk" and "risk adversity" yet then want to hide their ships off-grid while they reap the benefits for doing so. How about practicing what you preach?
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 34823	Posted - 2015.03.17 02:26:57 - [216] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Tbh the whole "links allow us to engage larger gangs"-argument says something about the person making it Here I would agree with you. It says those people are willing to accept responsibility to deal with things in game themselves, rather than crying to CCP to change things to make it easier for them. Budda Kuha wrote: Specifically that he or she is not capable of understanding a game mechanic and its impact beyond the limited scope of their personal experience. My reading of this thread suggests very much the opposite, but experience should be changed to 'bias'. Whinging and moaning and not accepting other peoples valid views because of your own bias hasn't been the position of those in this thread that accept links as a valid part of play. We all come up against skirmish linked Garmurs and similar. Yeah, they are a PITA but they can be countered. CCP will make changes to links when they get around to it. Stomping feet aren't going to make that happen any faster. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Avellean Evil Young Flesh 5	Posted - 2015.03.17 05:07:11 - [217] - Quote No need to get rid of offgrid boosts, everything in this game has a counter and the counter to ogb is being able to scan them down and kill them, even if you cant kill them you can cause them to keep warping which kills the boosts. In order for them to remove ogb they would have to go through every grid and fix them. They would have to change every grid in the game to be exactly alike.
Lienzo Amanuensis 51	Posted - 2015.03.17 06:35:20 - [218] - Quote I don't like them, but they are probably hard coded into the fleet booster system. Ergo, they ain't going anywhere SoonGäó or even in a near term span of time. Simple solution: Make links increase your signature, or decrease your sensor strength. It's not as much fun as having them on grid, but ECCM is no longer effective against virtue probers, or any probers when combined with links. You can now tank and arm them, or watch as people figure out their covops have damage bonuses at your expense. ECCM can still hide ships, just not booster ships. If they're armed, you might as well have them on grid.
Khimes Quds Virtus Crusade Curatores Veritatis Alliance 14	Posted - 2015.03.17 07:20:22 - [219] - Quote OGB = Pay to win. At least for solo pvp. It unbalances the game by nullifying disadvantages of ships or by giving them enormous advantages. A ship with high tank, high speed and high dps is the exact opposite of good game design. OGB should at least give one direct disadvantage to its users. People would brag for being good at pvp when I was doing FW pvp two years ago, now they are bragging for having a second account. This is simply terrible.
Zsha Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2015.03.17 07:44:01 - [220] - Quote Off grid boosting removes the competitive solo pvp element of the game. I prefer to play this way. I have always enjoyed the 1v1 element to any game I've ever played. Nothing more satisfying than going mind to mind / skill to skill with another opponent when playing games. I think "OFF" grid boosting is unfair for people who want to only pay for one account. If this "OFF" grid boosting was removed, which I think it should. Probably we would see more actual piloted command ships piloted in fleets? Since the only way other players can be boosted is through "ON-grid" boosting. OGB, I'd prefer if this feature wasn't in the game. It's clearly unfair for 1 account people? It's highly irritating IMO.

Charlie Jacobson 329	Posted - 2015.03.17 09:46:31 - [221] - Quote Personally I would prefer more drastic measures. Remove the whole concept of fleet boosting links and reimburse all the SP people have spent on it so they can spend that SP on something fun and engaging instead. I support James 315 and the New Order of Highsec
Algarion Getz Aideron Corp 29	Posted - 2015.03.17 10:16:46 - [222] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Mr Epeen wrote: Both fleets in an engagement can use OGB. I find it difficult to see the 'risk free advantage' here. Mr Epeen You're missing the point. Not everybody is willing or able to run a booster. Forcing people to run a second account to compete in small scale or solo pvp is a huge turn off. Furthermore the sheer existance of ogb penalizes players who like fast paced, spontanious and mobile pvp. It caters to risk-averse stationary pvp. For inherent logical reasons that decreases the total number of fights happening which equals to: bad for EVE pvp which equals to: Bad mechanic being bad for EVE. It's really as simple as that. The question remains: Why doesn't CCP take action? I fully agree. Why CCP doesnt take action? The only reason i can think of is that there are A LOT of booster alts and CCP doesnt want to loose all those subs. I mean, the current CCP is not afraid of (balance) changes: most ship types got rebalanced capitals got nerfed hard big changes will come to SOV warfare in June bold changes to game mechanics like imunity to directional scanners or removal of fighter assist But OGB is still in the game and AFAIK there are no plans to change it. Thats inconsistent.
Ddolik Viscosity Fidelas Constans 22	Posted - 2015.03.17 11:54:28 - [223] - Quote im against offgrid boosting
Shiva Linga Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 8	Posted - 2015.03.17 12:29:54 - [224] - Quote I poached a baby seal during my vacation in Greenland. Was nice and tasty...
Kamahl Daikun Back To Basics. 48	Posted - 2015.03.17 15:22:48 - [225] - Quote Kiandoshia wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: Mr Epeen wrote: Both fleets in an engagement can use OGB. I find it difficult to see the 'risk free advantage' here. Mr Epeen You're missing the point. Not everybody is willing or able to run a booster. There is problem. Become willing and able. Problem is no more. Eve 101 :D I'm curious about this train of thought. There are certain things that are mandatory for solo/small gang work: A) Command skills B) Relevant weapon and support skills C) Fitting skills Those are things that are either mandatory or greatly increase the efficiency of flying the ship. OGB, however, is optional yet made more and more mandatory the longer its used in its current state. I've read over the last few pages of the thread and the notion of "OGB is mandatory for solo/small gang" is pretty prevalent. However, what's the difference between: A) Solo/Small Gang against another Solo/Small Gang without OGB and B) Solo/Small Gang against another Solo/Small Gang with OGB The answer is pretty much nothing. Personally, I don't want to buy/train up another account just so I can have it AFK off grid to give me some bonuses. I find it a hassle and I'd rather just get drunk and ship spin at that point. On the other hand, if it's available and not against any ToS/Conditions, I don't see a reason not to use it. My problem is how it's becoming a necessity instead of a luxury.
Primary This Rifter 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 736	Posted - 2015.03.17 15:52:15 - [226] - Quote SmilingVagrant wrote: Just make it so the boosts can't be run within a pos. All major problems fixed. They've already done that. I don't think there's really any issue anymore. OGB is fine. Reminder: CCP thinks you have no right to your alliance logos.
Oddsodz The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare. 118	Posted - 2015.03.17 16:33:29 - [227] - Quote Primary This Rifter wrote: SmilingVagrant wrote: Just make it so the boosts can't be run within a pos. All major problems fixed. They've already done that. I don't think there's really any issue anymore. OGB is fine. Let me tell you about last night. Last night I was logged in to my home in lowsec that is factwar space, And I was having lots of fun chasing and being chased in my frig and destroyer ships. I would use my d-scan and see if facwar pilots was in one of the complex sites. I would then reship in to a ship that I could enter the site in and hope to have a fight. I was on my own and the only thing I had was my wits and skill at flying the ships I took. I was doing this all night. Sometime I would win, sometimes I had to run due to the target having friends that was coming to save the target (and that is cool). I was flying t1 frigs like Fed navy comets or Svipul or my wonderful hull tanked Eris. All the time I was solo. No links, I don't have link alt. Then about 11PM. I see that on one of the stations is a Damnation just idle on the undock. And then I knew my fun was over. Why? Becasue now all my targets can scram/web me before I can scram/web them. They can do it for longer ranges. Now all my skill in flying means jack ****. My weapons are now 50% less effective to any targets I now go for as they have a lower sig radius. Now all my targets are so much faster than me. I will not be able to catch them or out run them. Oh and I can not go and kill the links. As there is no why I can kill a Damnation before it docks. Oh and have to tank the gate guns too. So guess what I did. I LOGGED OFF. I QUIT PLAYING because now the locals have OFF GRID BOOSTING. All my my skill at flying spaceships was in one swoop just wiped away because now they have an off grid booster. 5 years ago CCP Soundwave said it was going to be removed (or words to that effect). 5 DAM YEARS. CCP WHY YOU SO DAM SLOW?
Avellean Evil Young Flesh 7	Posted - 2015.03.17 23:59:59 - [228] - Quote Oddsodz wrote: Primary This Rifter wrote: SmilingVagrant wrote: Just make it so the boosts can't be run within a pos. All major problems fixed. They've already done that. I don't think there's really any issue anymore. OGB is fine. Let me tell you about last night. Last night I was logged in to my home in lowsec that is factwar space, And I was having lots of fun chasing and being chased in my frig and destroyer ships. I would use my d-scan and see if facwar pilots was in one of the complex sites. I would then reship in to a ship that I could enter the site in and hope to have a fight. I was on my own and the only thing I had was my wits and skill at flying the ships I took. I was doing this all night. Sometime I would win, sometimes I had to run due to the target having friends that was coming to save the target (and that is cool). I was flying t1 frigs like Fed navy comets or Svipul or my wonderful hull tanked Eris. All the time I was solo. No links, I don't have link alt. Then about 11PM. I see that on one of the stations is a Damnation just idle on the undock. And then I knew my fun was over. Why? Becasue now all my targets can scram/web me before I can scram/web them. They can do it for longer ranges. Now all my skill in flying means jack **. My weapons are now 50% less effective to any targets I now go for as they have a lower sig radius. Now all my targets are so much faster than me. I will not be able to catch them or out run them. Oh and I can not go and kill the links. As there is no why I can kill a Damnation before it docks. Oh and have to tank the gate guns too. So guess what I did. I LOGGED OFF. I QUIT PLAYING because now the locals have OFF GRID BOOSTING. All my my skill at flying spaceships was in one swoop just wiped away because now they have an off grid booster. 5 years ago CCP Soundwave said it was going to be removed (or words to that effect). 5 DAM YEARS. CCP WHY YOU SO DAM SLOW? EDIT., As some have said. There is no point bitaching about it unless you can fix it. Well I can't fix it. But I can give "BAND AID" style ideas. Step one = add a weapons activation timer for using link module. This will force OFF GRID BOOSTING ships to go back to using safe spots. or sitting on a POS or haven forbid, STAY WITH THE FLEET. Step two = Change the rig calibration stats for the t2 Gravity Capacitor Upgrade II rig. Make it so that a CovOps ship can fit 2 of them. Why do I wish to change to the above? Well right now. Only a fool puts his t3 links in a safe spot in Lowsec or hisec (W-Space has no gates or stations). The safest place to put your links is on a station or a gate. In LowSec this is a very big issue as if you wish to shoot the OFF GRID BOOSTER ship. You will in 99% of cases have to go and tank the gate/station guns. And the OFF GRID BOOSTER can just dock or jump gate at any time it likes. Now in lowsec. Most PVP is done at the Frig Dessy and cruiser level. And Gate guns will eat you in the end if you have no logi. If I am going to have to put up with fighting links all the time, I want a way to kill them. Right now they can just dock or jump and run away. Can't stop them. So now if they have a they have weapons activation timer for using link module. They can't just sit on gates. They will go back to POS or safe spots. And if they are in a safe spot. I have a chance of killing them. All be it a ***** very low one. You see, I still need to spend 3bil of ISK on Virtue implants. Anybody that tells you you don't need implants to scan down a prober fit OFF GRID BOOSTING t3 that has the right ECCM implants and ECCM mods fitted is telling you lies. You still need Virtues. So there is my BAND AID FIXES. How hard is that I wonder? Make a boosting alt, if you feel its not worth the time or isk then don't complain. Other people have invested a lot of time and $$ into having an alt to run boosts, why would it be fair to them if that feature was removed? Would they be reimbursed for their time and money spent on this? There are to many broken grids in this game to make boosts only on grid.
Oddsodz The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare. 120	Posted - 2015.03.18 00:02:49 - [229] - Quote Avellean wrote: Make a boosting alt, if you feel its not worth the time or isk then don't complain. Other people have invested a lot of time and $$ into having an alt to run boosts, why would it be fair to them if that feature was removed? Would they be reimbursed for their time and money spent on this? There are to many broken grids in this game to make boosts only on grid. I don't a **** about players who have put money into have an extra account so they can have the "iWIN" button. Off GRID boosts is a lame "PAY2WIN" system that should have been got rid of 5 years ago. Why should I have to pay for an extra account just to even compete?
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 41	Posted - 2015.03.18 00:15:12 - [230] - Quote Oddsodz wrote: Avellean wrote: Make a boosting alt, if you feel its not worth the time or isk then don't complain. Other people have invested a lot of time and $$ into having an alt to run boosts, why would it be fair to them if that feature was removed? Would they be reimbursed for their time and money spent on this? There are to many broken grids in this game to make boosts only on grid. I don't a **** about players who have put money into have an extra account so they can have the "iWIN" button. Off GRID boosts is a lame "PAY2WIN" system that should have been got rid of 5 years ago. Why should I have to pay for an extra account just to even compete? he's right. also, since i'm drunk, i'm gonna say this: man up! be a sportsman ffs!

Barbara Nichole Cryogenic Consultancy 683	Posted - 2015.03.18 00:17:36 - [231] - Quote I seriously have no problem with off grid boosting. In fact, it's great. the booster is still in system and cannot be cloaked. If you don't like it have some scanners find the booster and then work to eliminate it.. The bottom line is without off gird boosting the Rorq is useless. Both sides in a fight have the ability to use equal boosting; if your enemy has taken the time and spent the money to set up and entrench they deserve to be a harder nut to crack. It's not the problem it's been painted to be. -á-á- remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not-á "afk" cloaking-á- [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
Natalia Abre-Kai 6	Posted - 2015.03.18 00:23:19 - [232] - Quote Barbara Nichole wrote: I seriously have no problem with off grid boosting. In fact, it's great. the booster is still in system and cannot be cloaked. If you don't like it have some scanners find the booster and then work to eliminate it.. The bottom line is without off gird boosting the Rorq is usless. It's not the problem it's been painted to be. Well some people whine just for the sake of whining. It's easier to kill an unsuspecting off-grid booster, then it is to kill one that is on grid in most cases. As someone mentioned before, if it's not boosting getting "targeted" it will be something else (strong pills, e-war, logi, hell... just having friends in general). Next up it will be, "It's unfair people have scanning modules on their ships to scan down my safes".
WhyYouHeffToBeMad IsOnlyGame 7052	Posted - 2015.03.18 06:18:44 - [233] - Quote YASRSLY DEALWITIT Everything's a game if you make it one - Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci Frostys Virpio > CCP: Continously Crying Playerbase
Mr Coulson S.H.I.E.L.D. HQ Sentinels of Sukanan Alliance 5	Posted - 2015.03.18 12:37:02 - [234] - Quote Well guys when the Jovian Fanatics (the ones with emotions reinstalled by the virus) start running super fleets rampant through your systems and blowing up your gates -- you will LOVE your off grid booster then! LOL Seriously though, I don't see the problem. I'm pretty new and so may see things differently. But I have seen way too many command ships serenely sitting off stations while battles rage somewhere else in the system. Do I have a problem with that, well .. yes and no. The problem is he sits there for an hour and no one even comes over to say hi. That is the problem. Yes a few things could be done to make it not so boring and easy to run booster ships -- like maybe - chase him down and kill him? Everyone does try to find these guys .. right? To make his job that much more fun (its boring sitting all alone while everyone else has the fun of shooting someones face off) make it impossible for them to do it near stations (ie., Links make the station' or gate's Sentry Guns Ears hurt - so they shoot the nerd with the boombox) or even near friendly towers (maybe they have sensitive hearing too and just go wacko - shooting everyone in sight?) Make it so they have to be out in the nice rich open spaces and uncloaked or sitting in an anomaly even (whoops no -- super aggro - rats have really good hearing) so when you do show up to blow their brains to kingdom come - they can't just dock up or hide -- Oh, you DO try to find these guys right?. TBH making them dock up works too - since the links will stop working. or even make it so the links lose most of their effectiveness when cloaked up so your Combat Scanner guy can find him in that 'safe' and jump him, you guys are trying to find and kill this guy right? Oh and about that 'You can hide from probes thingies' : "A warfare-linked Claymore (for example) with max leadership skills & mind-link implant becomes totally immune to probes when fitting 2x ECCM II and targeted with 3x ECCM projector II. ... may be impossible to find. " Yeah CCP may be a need to do some balancing for that. however the guy(s) providing the 3 extra ECCM's may be probable, either way the Command ship guy will need friends to help him hide (i.e., fewer ships to shoot u in the face - more ships to probe). besides it takes a VERY long time to train to the level needed to link boost, take drugs and make enough friends to help him hide from probes, so its only fair that the scanner guy trains just as long to find him. So to fix this thing that most people don't like (usually because they don't have it) by making the booster's life a little more fun, but not by putting him on the grid just so he - and his year of training - isn't always the first thing alpha'd off the field. Might as well take it out of the game in that case - since no one will even train for it anymore. This also goes back to one of my earlier posts about how newer players (and their newer Ideas that get nuked) who get frustrated with the game -- who see new ways to play, but end up not able to do it, and by the time wasted training to something that gets taken out of the game or changed so radically the new ideas wont work----- just to satisfy older players who are tired of something or stuck in one mode of play. So what ever is done, don't take game play away (even if its slightly OP), instead - add game play to counter it, make small changes, be creative. let new players coming into the game be part of what the game will become. And did I mention I have seen lots of command ships being ignored? Come on.. get the guy!
Arla Sarain 351	Posted - 2015.03.18 12:43:51 - [235] - Quote They won't get removed. All the "its the only way to fight with small gang against big gangs" - bollocks. OGB hurts small gangs more; who do you think is more likely to have OGB? More people - higher probability of OGB. All OGB do is make it impossible for soloers without OGB to do anything, even against another seemingly solo player.
kraken11 jensen The Gallant Collective Requiem Eternal 79	Posted - 2015.03.18 15:05:44 - [236] - Quote When you see me in local, in an fw plex. be aware. I probably don't use links. but I might have 1-2 falcon alts. - part off game, if it was removed. people would just complain about something else probably.
Chenguang Hucel-Ge Exiled Tech Space Monkey Protectorate 17	Posted - 2015.03.18 17:09:57 - [237] - Quote While off-grid boosting is evil, there's no way to justify using expensive boosting ships with off-grid boosting disabled. To justify that, boost will have to be buffed and this will lead just to another line of obligatory alts.
Brutus Le'montac 247	Posted - 2015.03.18 23:14:42 - [238] - Quote guys easy now, you are plugging the pipe with all those sweet salty tears. anyways, offgrid boost is fine as it is. either train your own ogb up, or get friends with one, and stop crying. its a perfectly valid mechanic, that anyone can reach if they train for it, nothing p2w, it gives a small edge, so what, you can get the same edge if you wish, instead of training for one you come here showering everyone in your buttmad tears.no wonder you stay mad, invest the time spewing on the forums towards making your own ogb. and if ogb needs to be ongrid, how about we force rorquals and orca's on grid aswell eh? that a good idea? no?why not? i bet i know the answer, cuz your little pesky ubercute mining fleets are at risk then to angry mean pvpers. its not having a cake and eating it to, and thats what most of you seem to want. HTFU was it right? maybe this time take it seriously, cuz you are all a bunch of whiney babies. Thought is dangerous; lack of thought, deadly!
Darth Virpio Caldari Provisions Caldari State 2	Posted - 2015.03.20 16:15:12 - [239] - Quote Brutus Le'montac wrote: guys easy now, you are plugging the pipe with all those sweet salty tears. anyways, offgrid boost is fine as it is. either train your own ogb up, or get friends with one, and stop crying. its a perfectly valid mechanic, that anyone can reach if they train for it, nothing p2w, it gives a small edge, so what, you can get the same edge if you wish, instead of training for one you come here showering everyone in your buttmad tears.no wonder you stay mad, invest the time spewing on the forums towards making your own ogb. and if ogb needs to be ongrid, how about we force rorquals and orca's on grid aswell eh? that a good idea? no?why not? i bet i know the answer, cuz your little pesky ubercute mining fleets are at risk then to angry mean pvpers. its not having a cake and eating it to, and thats what most of you seem to want. HTFU was it right? maybe this time take it seriously, cuz you are all a bunch of whiney babies. As far as I can see reading through this thread, the 'tears' here are coming from the supporters of the OGB system who seem petrified that they may, at some point in the future, lose them - or at least have the system altered to a point where they may have to change their playstyles. The only justifications being put forward seem to be "Well use one yourself and stop whining" which is about as stupid an argument as you can get. If you can't work out why its stupid then you have some logical thinking deficiency that probably needs some attention. Whichever way you cut it, its pay to win - plain and simple - and pay to win has no place in Eve. It is a factor, with the PLEX system, but it shouldn't be encouraged. Remember the lashback when CCP tried to install that model? That shows the strength of feeling in the community around that sort of mechanic. I have an OGB alt, but only really use it when when up against another gang/player who is using boosts. Partly for the gameplay and partly because dual-boxing is a pain in the ass (even if its only to switch boosts on) - I would probably use it more if you actually had to be in the fight - which makes a lot of sense to me. Why wouldn't you want to be in the action!
Tristan Valentina Moira. Villore Accords 8	Posted - 2015.03.20 16:25:10 - [240] - Quote If OGB goes away please just give me my SP back. Why is solo PvP so angry about people who are willing to get an advantage? That seems like EVE 101 "Find a way to win the fight before the fight happens." If you see honor in solo PvP fine but just because you find honor in something does not mean the other guy has to. Tristan

kraken11 jensen The Gallant Collective Requiem Eternal 80	Posted - 2015.03.21 19:52:35 - [241] - Quote Darth Virpio wrote: Brutus Le'montac wrote: guys easy now, you are plugging the pipe with all those sweet salty tears. anyways, offgrid boost is fine as it is. either train your own ogb up, or get friends with one, and stop crying. its a perfectly valid mechanic, that anyone can reach if they train for it, nothing p2w, it gives a small edge, so what, you can get the same edge if you wish, instead of training for one you come here showering everyone in your buttmad tears.no wonder you stay mad, invest the time spewing on the forums towards making your own ogb. and if ogb needs to be ongrid, how about we force rorquals and orca's on grid aswell eh? that a good idea? no?why not? i bet i know the answer, cuz your little pesky ubercute mining fleets are at risk then to angry mean pvpers. its not having a cake and eating it to, and thats what most of you seem to want. HTFU was it right? maybe this time take it seriously, cuz you are all a bunch of whiney babies. As far as I can see reading through this thread, the 'tears' here are coming from the supporters of the OGB system who seem petrified that they may, at some point in the future, lose them - or at least have the system altered to a point where they may have to change their playstyles. The only justifications being put forward seem to be "Well use one yourself and stop whining" which is about as stupid an argument as you can get. If you can't work out why its stupid then you have some logical thinking deficiency that probably needs some attention. Whichever way you cut it, its pay to win - plain and simple - and pay to win has no place in Eve. It is a factor, with the PLEX system, but it shouldn't be encouraged. Remember the lashback when CCP tried to install that model? That shows the strength of feeling in the community around that sort of mechanic. I have an OGB alt, but only really use it when when up against another gang/player who is using boosts. Partly for the gameplay and partly because dual-boxing is a pain in the ass (even if its only to switch boosts on) - I would probably use it more if you actually had to be in the fight - which makes a lot of sense to me. Why wouldn't you want to be in the action! First off, I got no OBG account/alt/character or whatever, But I accept that's its an part off the game, and since I don't have any OGB alt, doesn't mean that I cant support OGB or not. (I don't accuse anyone off saying anything, but I accept it even when fighting people who use it)
per Terpene Conglomerate 45	Posted - 2015.03.21 20:20:56 - [242] - Quote op +1
Kallen Kozukie Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 15	Posted - 2015.03.22 03:15:47 - [243] - Quote Either train for one yourself and run them yourself, have someone else in the corp do it, or have an alt do it. Don't want to ? why not? is it TOO BORING to sit and run links? that could be a reason why people use alts.... You failing to take advantage of the system in place is no one else's fault. You can slap 1-2 links on a command ship and fly it into combat if you wanted to, they arn't fragile ships, just not solo wtfpwnmobile boats. They are not mandatory, its simply better to have them if you can. I fail to see how whining and complaining for ccp to "nerf" it helps anyone. The options are there but refusing to use them is ignorant. Things were way worse when they could be ran inside a pos. All this talk of them being mandatory are just as false, plenty of folks don't use them or at least not all the time. Sometimes it's not feasable to try and sneak a booster in. Are we going to start crying about implants now because they give an advantage? It comes down to this, if your enemy is more prepared than you, that is no ones fault but your own, this whole Solo play honor concept means nothing in a community based pvp game, these are not arena's where everyone is wearing the same gear and its always an even fight.
Arronicus Fusion Enterprises Ltd Shadow of xXDEATHXx 1476	Posted - 2015.03.22 06:11:44 - [244] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Mr Epeen wrote: Both fleets in an engagement can use OGB. I find it difficult to see the 'risk free advantage' here. Mr Epeen You're missing the point. Not everybody is willing or able to run a booster. Forcing people to run a second account to compete in small scale or solo pvp is a huge turn off. Furthermore the sheer existance of ogb penalizes players who like fast paced, spontanious and mobile pvp. It caters to risk-averse stationary pvp. For inherent logical reasons that decreases the total number of fights happening which equals to: bad for EVE pvp which equals to: Bad mechanic being bad for EVE. It's really as simple as that. The question remains: Why doesn't CCP take action? You're missing the point. If someone isn't willing or able to run a booster, they shouldn't have that advantage. There is absolutely nothing 'risk free' about it, it's low risk, but it is additional effort, and you can be probed down and VERY easily killed.
hammerdick 7 Perkone Caldari State 0	Posted - 2015.03.28 13:55:01 - [245] - Quote Its literally a mechanic for the casual players who are not good at the game to get an advantage by paying money. it doesnt help nullsec alliances or big fleet fights because both sides have links anyways. just remove links from the game.
Saede Riordan Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 7535	Posted - 2015.03.28 14:07:12 - [246] - Quote I have perfect leadership skills and trained all the boosts. I like links quite a lot, I wish I could fit links on more ships. The issue with balancing around links is entirely related to offgrid boosting, otherwise links are balanced just fine by the SP/PG/CPU/slot requirements to fitting one. If boosting was on grid only, it'd be extra good too, because then you could possibly even look at having like, link destroyers running with frigate fleets. Fear and Loathing in Internet Spaceships
Natalia Abre-Kai 7	Posted - 2015.03.28 16:58:44 - [247] - Quote hammerdick 7 wrote: Its literally a mechanic for the casual players who are not good at the game to get an advantage by paying money. it doesnt help nullsec alliances or big fleet fights because both sides have links anyways. just remove links from the game. Confirming. Only "casuals" use links.
Anonymous Forumposter State War Academy Caldari State 202	Posted - 2015.03.29 02:50:13 - [248] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: ignorance filled rant The reasons it's still around is because it's not yet possible to get rid of it. In order to understand this, you'd need to understand the dire situation the server code has been in for a very long time. They are making efforts to fix it. It's just taking a very long time because there's no point putting fragile band aids on it and to do it right takes time. It's not, as you so ignorantly portrayed it, a design choice. It's a technical limitation that they're working to overcome.
kraken11 jensen The Gallant Collective Requiem Eternal 81	Posted - 2015.03.29 10:32:38 - [249] - Quote hammerdick 7 wrote: Its literally a mechanic for the casual players who are not good at the game to get an advantage by paying money. it doesnt help nullsec alliances or big fleet fights because both sides have links anyways. just remove links from the game. And an player can use money to buy plex to then sell it to afford and high sp character on bazaar. beaing able to use items/modules to their full extent. and sp is risk free (unless t3 crusier) and give an huge advantage. And some off the best players I know use links. (not always) but they at least they accept the tools/things that they can use. and eve cost money monthly. and if you pay more off course you should be able to train on another account. and anyway, eve is not fair.
Veld God Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2015.03.30 01:59:08 - [250] - Quote Carrie-Anne Moss wrote: Scipio Artelius wrote: Carrie-Anne Moss wrote: Ummm dont you think 10-30 ships SHOULD DIE IN SECONDS to 900 ships?? Lol The fact that 10-30 can last more than seconds against such odds is proof it is unlabanced. Haha, no. Look at how many small gangs come to catch for good fights and end up against larger Brave fleets, or third-partying into fights you guys are having already. Piloting skill means a lot more than links in those situations. Go and watch a couple of the Chessur videos on YouTube for good examples of that exact situation. We used to do the same in Barlequet before you took sov. 200 in system and we would snipe with kiting rails fits and everyone had a great time (without links too). Chessur is leet, yet flies billion isk ships with drugs and OFFGRID BOOSTERS lol thats the whole point dude. Wtf? Indeed. I alway lol about all that "Leet" Youtube PvP Heros, who would win not nearly 90 percent of their fights without OGB-¦s ;) Big Mike would have not won one single fight in his Kiting Battleships without offgrid boost etc usw.

Jallukola 50	Posted - 2015.03.30 06:24:07 - [251] - Quote Natalia Abre-Kai wrote: hammerdick 7 wrote: Its literally a mechanic for the casual players who are not good at the game to get an advantage by paying money. it doesnt help nullsec alliances or big fleet fights because both sides have links anyways. just remove links from the game. Confirming. Only "casuals" use links. What makes you think EVE was a "hardcore" game in the first place? Leo Moracchioli - All About That Bass Leo Moracchioli - Shake It Off
Pok Nibin Filial Pariahs 667	Posted - 2015.03.30 06:36:39 - [252] - Quote It's too hard for CCP to fix. They'd need 21st Century coding, and they prefer to work with antiques. The right to free speech doesn't automatically carry with it the right to be taken seriously.
Natalia Abre-Kai 7	Posted - 2015.03.30 06:48:55 - [253] - Quote Jallukola wrote: Natalia Abre-Kai wrote: hammerdick 7 wrote: Its literally a mechanic for the casual players who are not good at the game to get an advantage by paying money. it doesnt help nullsec alliances or big fleet fights because both sides have links anyways. just remove links from the game. Confirming. Only "casuals" use links. What makes you think EVE was a "hardcore" game in the first place? Whoosh.
Tia Aves 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 19	Posted - 2015.03.31 12:29:52 - [254] - Quote On one hand I hate off grid links - I mean you go 1v1 against something that you perceive to have a reasonable chance of killing and get trounced. I do not have a link alt and I would say I have been in maybe 20 fleets in my entire EVE career that has used them. But on the other hand... - That same target could not have links and be using implants / drugs / deadspace fittings and still roll me. Or even for that matter he could just have better skills. Navigation support skills for example can be the difference between winning easily or getting rolled badly. You and I are free to have all of these things but for different reasons we don't all have them. I don't fit deadspace mods because I don't rat enough for ISK, I don't have perfect support skills because I keep training useless **** like BLOPS and I don't have an off grid booster because in most cases it's more hassle than its worth. - You could always just scan the link boat down, or use tornadoes or something to alpha it off a station or gate. Don't tell me it's impossible my scanning alt can get them without Virtues. Even if you don't get the kill pressuring it to warp means no links active. It's exactly the same if someone brings a Falcon - you might not kill it but you have to apply pressure to force it from doing its job. - You could get smart and flag / identify link boats within your corporation or alliance. This works really well and after a few weeks you can generally identify who is using what links in a certain area and can avoid them if need be. Don't tell me that this discourages PvP for solo and small gangs because at the end of the day a 40 man Ishtar gang with logi discourages PvP if you are not in a gang of a similar size and composition. I probably see as many Ishtar gangs on a typical evening as I do link boats in low sec. - If you are insistent on being completely solo then you cannot complain at all because at the end of the day someone with friends is always going to win (with some reasonable assumptions made). - Remove them and the pilots who use them are just going to use alternative methods. Someone in my regular roaming area often uses a Gila or Worm with Tengu links. Please tell me that by replacing his OGB with another Gila or something like a Falcon alt is going to be easier to kill than the single DPS with boosts. Even if this guy went without his alt altogether his Worm is still going to destroy my Tristan so what do? At the end of the day it's another tool at a pilot or fleet's disposal. It is annoying getting destroyed by a linked pilot but it is nowhere near as rage inducing as watching someone's ECM alt uncloak when you land in a plex.
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 47	Posted - 2015.03.31 14:55:21 - [255] - Quote Tia Aves wrote: On one hand I hate off grid links - I mean you go 1v1 against something that you perceive to have a reasonable chance of killing and get trounced. I do not have a link alt and I would say I have been in maybe 20 fleets in my entire EVE career that has used them. But on the other hand... - That same target could not have links and be using implants / drugs / deadspace fittings and still roll me. Or even for that matter he could just have better skills. Navigation support skills for example can be the difference between winning easily or getting rolled badly. You and I are free to have all of these things but for different reasons we don't all have them. I don't fit deadspace mods because I don't rat enough for ISK, I don't have perfect support skills because I keep training useless **** like BLOPS and I don't have an off grid booster because in most cases it's more hassle than its worth. - You could always just scan the link boat down, or use tornadoes or something to alpha it off a station or gate. Don't tell me it's impossible my scanning alt can get them without Virtues. Even if you don't get the kill pressuring it to warp means no links active. It's exactly the same if someone brings a Falcon - you might not kill it but you have to apply pressure to force it from doing its job. - You could get smart and flag / identify link boats within your corporation or alliance. This works really well and after a few weeks you can generally identify who is using what links in a certain area and can avoid them if need be. Don't tell me that this discourages PvP for solo and small gangs because at the end of the day a 40 man Ishtar gang with logi discourages PvP if you are not in a gang of a similar size and composition. I probably see as many Ishtar gangs on a typical evening as I do link boats in low sec. - If you are insistent on being completely solo then you cannot complain at all because at the end of the day someone with friends is always going to win (with some reasonable assumptions made). - Remove them and the pilots who use them are just going to use alternative methods. Someone in my regular roaming area often uses a Gila or Worm with Tengu links. Please tell me that by replacing his OGB with another Gila or something like a Falcon alt is going to be easier to kill than the single DPS with boosts. Even if this guy went without his alt altogether his Worm is still going to destroy my Tristan so what do? At the end of the day it's another tool at a pilot or fleet's disposal. It is annoying getting destroyed by a linked pilot but it is nowhere near as rage inducing as watching someone's ECM alt uncloak when you land in a plex. You don't really undertstand solo pvp. Speed is essential, kitng is the most viable tactic and this is as it should be -you should be forced to use guerrilla tactics when fighting superior numbers. When you do, several targets are easier to fight than even one linked tackler. Adding a layer of useless meta to small scale pvp where you are forced to bring scanning alts, your own links etc just make pvp slow and favor passive, stational and risk averse behaviour. This also maked the barrier to participate in pvp even higher without adding anything interesting and that#s never a good thing. There is hope though. According to this brain in a box could be finished late summer btw: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xT6ddbIJRtg That means that the clock for the removal of ogb is probably, hopefully ticking.
kraken11 jensen The Gallant Collective Requiem Eternal 82	Posted - 2015.03.31 15:18:18 - [256] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: Tia Aves wrote: On one hand I hate off grid links - I mean you go 1v1 against something that you perceive to have a reasonable chance of killing and get trounced. I do not have a link alt and I would say I have been in maybe 20 fleets in my entire EVE career that has used them. But on the other hand... - That same target could not have links and be using implants / drugs / deadspace fittings and still roll me. Or even for that matter he could just have better skills. Navigation support skills for example can be the difference between winning easily or getting rolled badly. You and I are free to have all of these things but for different reasons we don't all have them. I don't fit deadspace mods because I don't rat enough for ISK, I don't have perfect support skills because I keep training useless **** like BLOPS and I don't have an off grid booster because in most cases it's more hassle than its worth. - You could always just scan the link boat down, or use tornadoes or something to alpha it off a station or gate. Don't tell me it's impossible my scanning alt can get them without Virtues. Even if you don't get the kill pressuring it to warp means no links active. It's exactly the same if someone brings a Falcon - you might not kill it but you have to apply pressure to force it from doing its job. - You could get smart and flag / identify link boats within your corporation or alliance. This works really well and after a few weeks you can generally identify who is using what links in a certain area and can avoid them if need be. Don't tell me that this discourages PvP for solo and small gangs because at the end of the day a 40 man Ishtar gang with logi discourages PvP if you are not in a gang of a similar size and composition. I probably see as many Ishtar gangs on a typical evening as I do link boats in low sec. - If you are insistent on being completely solo then you cannot complain at all because at the end of the day someone with friends is always going to win (with some reasonable assumptions made). - Remove them and the pilots who use them are just going to use alternative methods. Someone in my regular roaming area often uses a Gila or Worm with Tengu links. Please tell me that by replacing his OGB with another Gila or something like a Falcon alt is going to be easier to kill than the single DPS with boosts. Even if this guy went without his alt altogether his Worm is still going to destroy my Tristan so what do? At the end of the day it's another tool at a pilot or fleet's disposal. It is annoying getting destroyed by a linked pilot but it is nowhere near as rage inducing as watching someone's ECM alt uncloak when you land in a plex. You don't really undertstand solo pvp. Speed is essential, kitng is the most viable tactic and this is as it should be -you should be forced to use guerrilla tactics when fighting superior numbers. When you do, several targets are easier to fight than even one linked tackler. Adding a layer of useless meta to small scale pvp where you are forced to bring scanning alts, your own links etc just make pvp slow and favor passive, stational and risk averse behaviour. This als maked the barrier to participate in pvp even higher. Well, you're not forced to have an scanning charter, if you want that ''solo pvp'' then go outside an station and duel people. or get some friends to have an duel against you. and kiting is one off the most viable, if not the most viable tactic. and that's correct. And as I said. you're not forced to do anything. Also, as I said earlier... Sp is the biggest bonus compare to risk because there is none (as long you don't use t3 cruisers) and there is skills witch give so huge bonuses each level, and compare to people who don't have it is an huge bonus. And what i want to say is, come and look at hero fleets. links or not. we fight. we got people who fight people with links (and they do indeed not have them itself a lot off the times) i have managed to catch an linked ortherus with an cyclone. (no links) and the biggest reward at the lowest risk (non existent) is sp, so yeah. (Sp > links) <- personally. (i might have written some words wrongly here and probably have to edit to fix my terrible spelling)
Budda Kuha Ministry of War Amarr Empire 47	Posted - 2015.03.31 15:26:08 - [257] - Quote kraken11 jensen wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: Tia Aves wrote: On one hand I hate off grid links - I mean you go 1v1 against something that you perceive to have a reasonable chance of killing and get trounced. I do not have a link alt and I would say I have been in maybe 20 fleets in my entire EVE career that has used them. But on the other hand... - That same target could not have links and be using implants / drugs / deadspace fittings and still roll me. Or even for that matter he could just have better skills. Navigation support skills for example can be the difference between winning easily or getting rolled badly. You and I are free to have all of these things but for different reasons we don't all have them. I don't fit deadspace mods because I don't rat enough for ISK, I don't have perfect support skills because I keep training useless **** like BLOPS and I don't have an off grid booster because in most cases it's more hassle than its worth. - You could always just scan the link boat down, or use tornadoes or something to alpha it off a station or gate. Don't tell me it's impossible my scanning alt can get them without Virtues. Even if you don't get the kill pressuring it to warp means no links active. It's exactly the same if someone brings a Falcon - you might not kill it but you have to apply pressure to force it from doing its job. - You could get smart and flag / identify link boats within your corporation or alliance. This works really well and after a few weeks you can generally identify who is using what links in a certain area and can avoid them if need be. Don't tell me that this discourages PvP for solo and small gangs because at the end of the day a 40 man Ishtar gang with logi discourages PvP if you are not in a gang of a similar size and composition. I probably see as many Ishtar gangs on a typical evening as I do link boats in low sec. - If you are insistent on being completely solo then you cannot complain at all because at the end of the day someone with friends is always going to win (with some reasonable assumptions made). - Remove them and the pilots who use them are just going to use alternative methods. Someone in my regular roaming area often uses a Gila or Worm with Tengu links. Please tell me that by replacing his OGB with another Gila or something like a Falcon alt is going to be easier to kill than the single DPS with boosts. Even if this guy went without his alt altogether his Worm is still going to destroy my Tristan so what do? At the end of the day it's another tool at a pilot or fleet's disposal. It is annoying getting destroyed by a linked pilot but it is nowhere near as rage inducing as watching someone's ECM alt uncloak when you land in a plex. You don't really undertstand solo pvp. Speed is essential, kitng is the most viable tactic and this is as it should be -you should be forced to use guerrilla tactics when fighting superior numbers. When you do, several targets are easier to fight than even one linked tackler. Adding a layer of useless meta to small scale pvp where you are forced to bring scanning alts, your own links etc just make pvp slow and favor passive, stational and risk averse behaviour. This als maked the barrier to participate in pvp even higher. Well, you're not forced to have an scanning charter, if you want that ''solo pvp'' then go outside an station and duel people. or get some friends to have an duel against you. and kiting is one off the most viable, if not the most viable tactic. and that's correct. And as I said. you're not forced to do anything. Also, as I said earlier... Sp is the biggest bonus compare to risk because there is none (as long you don't use t3 cruisers) and there is skills witch give so huge bonuses each level, and compare to people who don't have it is an huge bonus. And what i want to say is, come and look at hero fleets. links or not. we fight. we got people who fight people with links (and they do indeed not have them itself a lot off the times) i have managed to catch an linked ortherus with an cyclone. (no links) and the biggest reward at the lowest risk (non existent) is sp, so yeah. (Sp > links) <- personally. (i might have written some words wrongly here and probably have to edit to fix my terrible spelling) Let me sum this up: In your opinion everbyody who doesn't run links should just restrict himself friendly duels at stations in order to preserve a useless, tedious mechanic. Problem solved and surely this will be good for subscription numbers. On a more serious note: Do you see the problem now?
kraken11 jensen The Gallant Collective Requiem Eternal 82	Posted - 2015.04.01 13:53:26 - [258] - Quote Budda Kuha wrote: kraken11 jensen wrote: Budda Kuha wrote: Tia Aves wrote: On one hand I hate off grid links - I mean you go 1v1 against something that you perceive to have a reasonable chance of killing and get trounced. I do not have a link alt and I would say I have been in maybe 20 fleets in my entire EVE career that has used them. But on the other hand... - That same target could not have links and be using implants / drugs / deadspace fittings and still roll me. Or even for that matter he could just have better skills. Navigation support skills for example can be the difference between winning easily or getting rolled badly. You and I are free to have all of these things but for different reasons we don't all have them. I don't fit deadspace mods because I don't rat enough for ISK, I don't have perfect support skills because I keep training useless **** like BLOPS and I don't have an off grid booster because in most cases it's more hassle than its worth. - You could always just scan the link boat down, or use tornadoes or something to alpha it off a station or gate. Don't tell me it's impossible my scanning alt can get them without Virtues. Even if you don't get the kill pressuring it to warp means no links active. It's exactly the same if someone brings a Falcon - you might not kill it but you have to apply pressure to force it from doing its job. - You could get smart and flag / identify link boats within your corporation or alliance. This works really well and after a few weeks you can generally identify who is using what links in a certain area and can avoid them if need be. Don't tell me that this discourages PvP for solo and small gangs because at the end of the day a 40 man Ishtar gang with logi discourages PvP if you are not in a gang of a similar size and composition. I probably see as many Ishtar gangs on a typical evening as I do link boats in low sec. - If you are insistent on being completely solo then you cannot complain at all because at the end of the day someone with friends is always going to win (with some reasonable assumptions made). - Remove them and the pilots who use them are just going to use alternative methods. Someone in my regular roaming area often uses a Gila or Worm with Tengu links. Please tell me that by replacing his OGB with another Gila or something like a Falcon alt is going to be easier to kill than the single DPS with boosts. Even if this guy went without his alt altogether his Worm is still going to destroy my Tristan so what do? At the end of the day it's another tool at a pilot or fleet's disposal. It is annoying getting destroyed by a linked pilot but it is nowhere near as rage inducing as watching someone's ECM alt uncloak when you land in a plex. You don't really undertstand solo pvp. Speed is essential, kitng is the most viable tactic and this is as it should be -you should be forced to use guerrilla tactics when fighting superior numbers. When you do, several targets are easier to fight than even one linked tackler. Adding a layer of useless meta to small scale pvp where you are forced to bring scanning alts, your own links etc just make pvp slow and favor passive, stational and risk averse behaviour. This als maked the barrier to participate in pvp even higher. Well, you're not forced to have an scanning charter, if you want that ''solo pvp'' then go outside an station and duel people. or get some friends to have an duel against you. and kiting is one off the most viable, if not the most viable tactic. and that's correct. And as I said. you're not forced to do anything. Also, as I said earlier... Sp is the biggest bonus compare to risk because there is none (as long you don't use t3 cruisers) and there is skills witch give so huge bonuses each level, and compare to people who don't have it is an huge bonus. And what i want to say is, come and look at hero fleets. links or not. we fight. we got people who fight people with links (and they do indeed not have them itself a lot off the times) i have managed to catch an linked ortherus with an cyclone. (no links) and the biggest reward at the lowest risk (non existent) is sp, so yeah. (Sp > links) <- personally. (i might have written some words wrongly here and probably have to edit to fix my terrible spelling) Let me sum this up: In your opinion everbyody who doesn't run links should just restrict himself to friendly duels at stations in order to preserve a useless, tedious mechanic. Problem solved and surely this will be good for subscription numbers! On a more serious note: Do you see the problem now? I didn't say that as far as I know. and there is nothing that keep you away fighting people with links. and it's not useless. and the only one restricting this is yourself, ccp, the game limits, and your wallet. you can go out there and fight anyone. links or not, it doesn't meant that you're going to win. and if you would restrict yourself to not fight people who use links. then that's an restriction that you set yourself. (I by an mistake deleted with what I was going to respond with, so I just wrote up an quick response because I didn't want to write it all again) (also idk)
Baali Tekitsu AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse 725	Posted - 2015.04.01 14:50:10 - [259] - Quote Its as if all people argueing against links forgot that you can simply choose not to fight that linked garmur doing 8k/s. Its often more than obvious that people are using links. The mechanic itself should definatly be brought on grid though ASAP, there is basically no difference between them and skynet. RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.