Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1253
|
Posted - 2015.04.04 23:17:09 -
[1] - Quote
I had a recent thought regarding off grid boosting and how it functions. Now instead of coming up with ideas on how to fix the technology of it, I would like to propose a different option.
Leave it.
Leave off grid boosting exactly how it is and how it works.
Permit battle cruisers (t1 and command ships) to negate it.
We have the basis for bubbles. Why not expand it.
Permit battlecruisers tousle that utility slot of theirs to project a anti grid sphere. Make it big (like 100 km wide) negates all boosting effects that aren't within that sphere of influence. Similar to how HIC's can shutdown warp drives.
If you want to be creative, allow every booster module to be able to script itself. Sphere negation script. Everything that is inside the sphere loses any off grid effects. At the same time, the booster ongrid will provide its boosts to the fleet.
So instead of nerfing offgrid boosts, give the players the ability to negate the effects through a fleet comp.
Spitballing an idea while watching the final four.
Thoughts?
Yaay!!!!
|

Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1666
|
Posted - 2015.04.04 23:20:47 -
[2] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:I had a recent thought regarding off grid boosting and how it functions. Now instead of coming up with ideas on how to fix the technology of it, I would like to propose a different option.
Leave it.
Leave off grid boosting exactly how it is and how it works.
Permit battle cruisers (t1 and command ships) to negate it.
We have the basis for bubbles. Why not expand it.
Permit battlecruisers tousle that utility slot of theirs to project a anti grid sphere. Make it big (like 100 km wide) negates all boosting effects that aren't within that sphere of influence. Similar to how HIC's can shutdown warp drives.
If you want to be creative, allow every booster module to be able to script itself. Sphere negation script. Everything that is inside the sphere loses any off grid effects. At the same time, the booster ongrid will provide its boosts to the fleet.
So instead of nerfing ongrid boosts, give the players the ability to negate the effects through a fleet comp.
Spitballing an idea while watching the final four.
Thoughts?
Why should the counter need to be on grid while the primary effect does not?
|

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3307
|
Posted - 2015.04.04 23:21:20 -
[3] - Quote
Server load.
Now you have to check range from every single ship in every fleet on field to every single T1 battlecruiser on field, every second. |

Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1253
|
Posted - 2015.04.04 23:24:01 -
[4] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Phoenix Jones wrote:I had a recent thought regarding off grid boosting and how it functions. Now instead of coming up with ideas on how to fix the technology of it, I would like to propose a different option.
Leave it.
Leave off grid boosting exactly how it is and how it works.
Permit battle cruisers (t1 and command ships) to negate it.
We have the basis for bubbles. Why not expand it.
Permit battlecruisers tousle that utility slot of theirs to project a anti grid sphere. Make it big (like 100 km wide) negates all boosting effects that aren't within that sphere of influence. Similar to how HIC's can shutdown warp drives.
If you want to be creative, allow every booster module to be able to script itself. Sphere negation script. Everything that is inside the sphere loses any off grid effects. At the same time, the booster ongrid will provide its boosts to the fleet.
So instead of nerfing ongrid boosts, give the players the ability to negate the effects through a fleet comp.
Spitballing an idea while watching the final four.
Thoughts?
Why should the counter need to be on grid while the primary effect does not?
I'm assuming CCP can't limit the boosting effect because of how it functions. They could limit the effect based On a center point created by a separate module activated by the player though.
Yaay!!!!
|

Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1253
|
Posted - 2015.04.04 23:26:41 -
[5] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Server load.
Now you have to check range from every single ship in every fleet on field to every single T1 battlecruiser on field, every second.
that can be tested. I wouldn't discount it based on load. We took maybe 70 HIC's into null last week with some comical effects when we all turned on the bubbles.
I don't see that as a specific issue.
Yaay!!!!
|

Arla Sarain
375
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 00:04:46 -
[6] - Quote
Make it a targeted ability/module.
Battlecruisers are now needed in high numbers, with fit focusing on targeting count. Auto-targetting units become desirable. |

Anhenka
Infinite Point Nulli Secunda
1350
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 00:31:26 -
[7] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:Danika Princip wrote:Server load.
Now you have to check range from every single ship in every fleet on field to every single T1 battlecruiser on field, every second. that can be tested. I wouldn't discount it based on load. We took maybe 70 HIC's into null last week with some comical effects when we all turned on the bubbles. I don't see that as a specific issue.
HIC's and other bubbles are not an issue, because the check to see if you are in a bubble only occurs when you actually try and warp.
Very different from a proposed system where distance checks have to be performed every second for ever ship. |

Zavand Crendraven
Rolling Static Gone Critical
14
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 01:39:01 -
[8] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote: I'm assuming CCP can't limit the boosting effect because of how it functions. They could limit the effect based On a center point created by a separate module activated by the player though.
How would CCP be able to tell if a specified ship (read the link ship) is on grid or in an AoE but will be able to tell if another specified ship (read proposed link canceller) in on grid or an AoE? |

El Geo
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
221
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 07:09:41 -
[9] - Quote
There are already effective counters to off grid boosting, such as the following.
Put pressure onto the opposing gang to use their links and use combat probes to find and kill the offending ogb.
Use your own links.
Don't engage.
Stop being bad.
path-+find-+er (pthfndr, p+ñth-)n. 1. One that discovers a new course or way, especially through or into unexplored regions.
http://www.youtube.com/user/EvEPathfinders/videos?view=0
|

Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
158
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 07:18:18 -
[10] - Quote
The concept was to have Command Ships and BCs (LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO) fit 2-3 of these modules in utility highs and be a heroic on-grid... Command ship. 
A very long time ago something, something, somewhere went horribly wrong and now you have cancer. A considerable portion of second accounts are used for OGB, so GOOD LUCK trying to use common sense against cold, hard, currency which is generated here. 
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
|

The Pink Unicorn
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 08:28:56 -
[11] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Server load.
Now you have to check range from every single ship in every fleet on field to every single T1 battlecruiser on field, every second.
perhaps this could be a deploy-able item instead? |

James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
490
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 08:38:28 -
[12] - Quote
The Pink Unicorn wrote:Danika Princip wrote:Server load.
Now you have to check range from every single ship in every fleet on field to every single T1 battlecruiser on field, every second. perhaps this could be a deploy-able item instead? It would still need to do the server melting distance checks, or have a system wide effect.
I like the second one much better. An entosis link requiring deploy-able which scrambles all fleet boosts in the system, skill related or link related. Titan boosts are the only thing immune, as come on, we need some reason to keep building giant space penii.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|

Saisin
State War Academy Caldari State
240
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 11:09:26 -
[13] - Quote
+1 I think this is a very creative idea, but rather than making it a bubble, simply make it a grid effect. All ships within the same grid as the battlecuriser equiped with such an active mod would not be able to receive off-grid links, but would still receive on-grid links.
"surrender your ego, be free". innuendo.
solo? There is a new hope...
|

Reina Xyaer
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
86
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 12:19:36 -
[14] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Server load.
Now you have to check range from every single ship in every fleet on field to every single T1 battlecruiser on field, every second.
You know, like it's already doing if you're on grid with each other?
Danika I'm pretty sure you're just completely full of sh*t. I'm not supporting this idea at all... but this post by you is nonsense...
If there's 50 people on grid, the server is checking the range of everyone to everyone else, every tick. |

Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1255
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 13:44:50 -
[15] - Quote
El Geo wrote:There are already effective counters to off grid boosting, such as the following.  Put pressure onto the opposing gang to use their links and use combat probes to find and kill the offending ogb.  Use your own links.  Don't engage.  Stop being bad.
Sending out combat probers to catch combat boosters isn't a solution. Considering good chunks of them can simply sit on a undock or hugging a shield.
Counters to a bad system isn't to bring the same thing. Any strategy is lost. There should be a way to either bring the booster on grid or negate their boosting effects of combatant within the same grid of your booster (you risk it, if they don't like it, they can either go risk their booster by bringing it ongrid or go without it).
Pretty pointless to play of the answer to every situation is (bring this max ship for the fleet or just don't bother coming at all). The reverse should apply.
And none of this implies being good or bad, it's a flawed mechanic that can't be countered by the player base.
Yaay!!!!
|

Lugh Crow-Slave
1029
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 13:49:04 -
[16] - Quote
lol forcing boosts on grid will reportedly light the hamsters ablaze
now you want the sever to check weather or not it is allowed?
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3? Corp Stasis
|

Agondray
Avenger Mercenaries VOID Intergalactic Forces
293
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 14:02:09 -
[17] - Quote
this wont be abused
"Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith
|

Phaade
Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF
315
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 14:27:28 -
[18] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:The concept was to have Command Ships and BCs (LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO) fit 2-3 of these modules in utility highs and be a heroic on-grid... Command ship.  A very long time ago something, something, somewhere went horribly wrong and now you have cancer. A considerable portion of second accounts are used for OGB, so GOOD LUCK trying to use common sense against cold, hard, currency which is generated here. 
This man knows the truth.
CCP is far more interested in cash generated from link alts than balance.
Of that we can be certain. |

El Geo
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
222
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 15:15:18 -
[19] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Sending out combat probers to catch combat boosters isn't a solution. Considering good chunks of them can simply sit on a undock or hugging a shield.
Counters to a bad system isn't to bring the same thing. Any strategy is lost. There should be a way to either bring the booster on grid or negate their boosting effects of combatant within the same grid of your booster (you risk it, if they don't like it, they can either go risk their booster by bringing it ongrid or go without it).
Pretty pointless to play of the answer to every situation is (bring this max ship for the fleet or just don't bother coming at all). The reverse should apply.
And none of this implies being good or bad, it's a flawed mechanic that can't be countered by the player base.
Bringing links on grid only ensures larger gangs safety, most off grid boosts are for people who can seemingly 'solo' entire fleets of people who then complain on the forum about how off grid links are broken, the problem is they are too lazy to learn how to counter effectively.
Seperating players from their links by either putting combat probes out (they can either remain cloaked or take the risk), leaving system for a 'pull', camping the undock/gate or using your own links are all viable tactics, these are things small gang and solo players understand and dullsov blobbers don't, so yes, if people can not see the logical and even obvious answers they make themselves look bad.
path-+find-+er (pthfndr, p+ñth-)n. 1. One that discovers a new course or way, especially through or into unexplored regions.
http://www.youtube.com/user/EvEPathfinders/videos?view=0
|

FT Diomedes
The Graduates Forged of Fire
920
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 15:47:25 -
[20] - Quote
Just stop being bad... I routinely run on-grid boosts from my Claymore on one character, while using another character to scare the opposing gang's booster into leaving or hiding. Nothing is stopping people from doing combat probing and killing off-grid boosters. If the OGB is at a Death Star POS, just fight in another system if you cannot handle their boosted gang.
The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.
|
|

Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
178
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 17:15:41 -
[21] - Quote
There are counters to OGB in some situations but not all. The mechanic is unintuitive and forces you to drag combat scan alts around. The OP solution is interesting but could it be more elegant?
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
|

Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1667
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 19:53:08 -
[22] - Quote
Chance Ravinne wrote:There are counters to OGB in some situations but not all. The mechanic is unintuitive and forces you to drag combat scan alts around. The OP solution is interesting but could it be more elegant?
If you are willing to put an anti-boost on grid, just put the damn boost on grid and be done with it. The server requirement would be the same. CCP already said the problem with putting links on grid is server load. Until that gets fixed/worked around we all have to deal with the stupidity of off-grid pilots having an effect into fights. Now that fighter assignment is gone, links are pretty much the least thing that still works while not being on grid. I'd bet they are willing to remove it as long as it does not cost too much server resources. |

Wolf Lafisques
Omega Biomass Collection
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 20:18:38 -
[23] - Quote
I didn't read all of the comments, so I apologize if I'm restating a suggestion that has already been made. What about incorporating a mechanic that makes boosts less effective the further away they are from their fleet? It seems like it would be a decent compromise. That way they have to choose between being closer to danger to provide more effective boosts, or being farther away from danger at the cost of the effectiveness of their boosts. It would fit nicely into the risk vs. reward aspect of the game as well. |

El Geo
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
222
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 20:21:18 -
[24] - Quote
Chance Ravinne wrote:There are counters to OGB in some situations but not all. The mechanic is unintuitive and forces you to drag combat scan alts around. The OP solution is interesting but could it be more elegant?
Please, I can say "there are counters to larger gangs in some situations but not all", it's the same difference for a tonne of things in Eve, people will tell me to simply not engage or to try and split the gang up. All of the counters I've listed, including not engaging, I have personally seen or have experience with, I've even fought against larger gangs and had to seperate their fast tackle out of the system they have links in.
path-+find-+er (pthfndr, p+ñth-)n. 1. One that discovers a new course or way, especially through or into unexplored regions.
http://www.youtube.com/user/EvEPathfinders/videos?view=0
|

Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
1945
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 20:41:07 -
[25] - Quote
Until they come on grid I would like to see the combat links give a weapons timer. This would help prevent the pathetic station and gate hugging we see in lowsec and add a bit of risk.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|

Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1255
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 20:51:53 -
[26] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Just stop being bad... I routinely run on-grid boosts from my Claymore on one character, while using another character to scare the opposing gang's booster into leaving or hiding. Nothing is stopping people from doing combat probing and killing off-grid boosters. If the OGB is at a Death Star POS, just fight in another system if you cannot handle their boosted gang.
Well the deal is that if we want to bring the fight, we would have to bring our own set of boosters.
No one has a objection with that.
What was proposed is that either side have a way to negate that teams boosting bonus by bringing that boosting ship ongrid and being an active part of that combat fleet.
So I bring the fight to your boosted system, and project a field that negates your offgrid boosts for a range of x.
At that point, I've committed my gang into your home, and brought my own booster. To really screw you I keep him ongrid to knock off your offgrid effects.
Tables turned. Come at me without any links, bring your link ship to fight, or go home.
Currently people do not want links nerfed because of the bonuses they give, the afk opportunity they give for a fleet in a system... And that they are system wide. Frankly people don't want their booster alts nerfed So they aren't. Instead, give a incursion force the ability to deal with it by committing their booster to the field to counteract your 5 afk command ships on the undock.
Fleet wide and system wide boosts continue to exist, and combat ship pilots have a active role in a fleet to bring their combat capable ship to the fleet.
No nerf, only new tools and a new role.
Yaay!!!!
|

El Geo
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
222
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 20:54:01 -
[27] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Until they come on grid I would like to see the combat links give a weapons timer. This would help prevent the pathetic station and gate hugging we see in lowsec and add a bit of risk.
Weapon timer sounds reasonable and logical (I'd even go as far as to say give them the same timers as logi) but imo moving them "on grid only" only benefits larger blocs who always roam in gangs and takes away from people who enjoy taking on much larger groups than their own by way of guerilla tactics, pulling and seperating fleets up to pick off stragglers and inexperienced players.
path-+find-+er (pthfndr, p+ñth-)n. 1. One that discovers a new course or way, especially through or into unexplored regions.
http://www.youtube.com/user/EvEPathfinders/videos?view=0
|

Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1668
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 21:25:48 -
[28] - Quote
El Geo wrote:Zappity wrote:Until they come on grid I would like to see the combat links give a weapons timer. This would help prevent the pathetic station and gate hugging we see in lowsec and add a bit of risk. Weapon timer sounds reasonable and logical (I'd even go as far as to say give them the same timers as logi) but imo moving them "on grid only" only benefits larger blocs who always roam in gangs and takes away from people who enjoy taking on much larger groups than their own by way of guerilla tactics, pulling and seperating fleets up to pick off stragglers and inexperienced players.
The separated fleet and stragglers would also have no links since you can assume their links would of followed the main body of the fleet if it had to be on grid. Same applies for stragglers. |

Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1668
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 21:28:13 -
[29] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Just stop being bad... I routinely run on-grid boosts from my Claymore on one character, while using another character to scare the opposing gang's booster into leaving or hiding. Nothing is stopping people from doing combat probing and killing off-grid boosters. If the OGB is at a Death Star POS, just fight in another system if you cannot handle their boosted gang. Well the deal is that if we want to bring the fight, we would have to bring our own set of boosters. No one has a objection with that. What was proposed is that either side have a way to negate that teams boosting bonus by bringing that boosting ship ongrid and being an active part of that combat fleet. So I bring the fight to your boosted system, and project a field that negates your offgrid boosts for a range of x. At that point, I've committed my gang into your home, and brought my own booster. To really screw you I keep him ongrid to knock off your offgrid effects. Tables turned. Come at me without any links, bring your link ship to fight, or go home. Currently people do not want links nerfed because of the bonuses they give, the afk opportunity they give for a fleet in a system... And that they are system wide. Frankly people don't want their booster alts nerfed So they aren't. Instead, give a incursion force the ability to deal with it by committing their booster to the field to counteract your 5 afk command ships on the undock. Fleet wide and system wide boosts continue to exist, and combat ship pilots have a active role in a fleet to bring their combat capable ship to the fleet. No nerf, only new tools and a new role.
Or you bring the links on grid and that new role for being on grid to counter link is given in reverse to the booster who has to be on grid to give boosts. Not nerfing something just because people are used to it and don't want it nerfed is stupid. |

Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
340
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 21:55:28 -
[30] - Quote
This doesn't add anything over simply removing off-grid boosting. It's harder to implement and doesn't actually add any depth of gameplay beyond "you either bring a BC to negate OGBs or your opponent keeps getting boost for free"
Chance Ravinne wrote:There are counters to OGB in some situations but not all. The mechanic is unintuitive and forces you to drag combat scan alts around. The OP solution is interesting but could it be more elegant?
How about simply removing off-grid boosting, as originally talked about by CCP, and force boosters on-grid. If you can't keep them alive but the enemy can then you're already losing. Simple, elegant, no need for a mess of "bring this ship and push button to hard counter this bush button for 10% boost mechanic" |
|

James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
494
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 22:05:25 -
[31] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:This doesn't add anything over simply removing off-grid boosting. It's harder to implement and doesn't actually add any depth of gameplay beyond "you either bring a BC to negate OGBs or your opponent keeps getting boost for free" Chance Ravinne wrote:There are counters to OGB in some situations but not all. The mechanic is unintuitive and forces you to drag combat scan alts around. The OP solution is interesting but could it be more elegant? How about simply removing off-grid boosting, as originally talked about by CCP, and force boosters on-grid. If you can't keep them alive but the enemy can then you're already losing. Simple, elegant, no need for a mess of "bring this ship and push button to hard counter this bush button for 10% boost mechanic"
The last prototype they had for on grid boosting was an absolute mess as far as server load. If I recall the comments right, CCP Fozzie said they hit 10% tidi with 10 people in the fight. What is being looked for here seems to be a method to suture the gaping problems with the current mechanics until an elegant solution can be found or created for the mechanic as a whole. It really seems to be a case of "The best is the enemy of the good." on this topic.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|

Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
176
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 22:11:50 -
[32] - Quote
Perhaps move all of the Skirmish/Armour/Shield/etc bonuses onto a deploytable structure, that will provide OGB just the same, but would be easily probable/immobile.
Deployment of said sexy structure should require the same skills as current links.
Probably a concept for the new structure system. 
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|

Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1008
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 22:18:34 -
[33] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote: Or you bring the links on grid and that new role for being on grid to counter link is given in reverse to the booster who has to be on grid to give boosts. Not nerfing something just because people are used to it and don't want it nerfed is stupid.
Long standing features (unless immediately game breaking and absolutely can't be dealt with any other way) should always be approached with caution - especially things like fleet command which required multiple high rank level V skills to be fully effective.
Also balancing a game shouldn't be about rushing to nerf/remove something as the first port of call... in many cases you then just unbalance something else (feature Y) that is actually in a fairly good place but with feature X removed entirely or made ineffective becomes a problem.
Personally I'd have liked to see link use become more tactical - amongst other things with a few more variations of mindlinks a bit like boosters where the least effective ones have no penalties and the most powerful ones have some kind of trade off - especially penalties to the person doing the boosting. (There is probably potential there as well to make off grid PVP boosting ineffective or unattractive while not impacting on areas unrelated to PVP i.e. just as an example a mindlink that while giving good bonuses came at a significant trade off to sensor strength). |

MicDeath Titan
Titans Guild
98
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 02:07:17 -
[34] - Quote
I'm surprised CCP hasn't tied boosts to Grid_ID. The server load is already accounted for and optimized. |

Anhenka
Infinite Point Nulli Secunda
1360
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 02:09:16 -
[35] - Quote
MicDeath Titan wrote:I'm surprised CCP hasn't tied boosts to Grid_ID. The server load is already accounted for and optimized.
I'd give 1,000,000:1 odds that it's not anywhere near that simple.
Unless you happen to be a former CCP developer? |

Lienzo
Amanuensis
77
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 06:17:20 -
[36] - Quote
CCP have stated that it's all in the legacy code, and they don't have the people on hand to change it.
What they can do is make it simply not worthwhile to not have boosters on grid. The easiest way to do it is to simply have warfare links or command processors reduce sensor strength.
Another thing that can be done is to give POS and stations some kind of warfare link activation exclusion radius, like 100km. However, POS are on the way out, so it might be a wasted effort.
If you can hide them or tuck them out of the way, you might as well have the ship in the fight.
Deep down, I like the idea of gang links. I think they should be an option for ships of every size. I like the idea of them affecting one, and only one squad. I like the idea of that 10 man squad being able to mix and match the kinds of effects they want for the kind of role they intend to exert. I like the idea of minor skirmish links with a fraction of the familiar effect mounted on interceptors, or more diverse smaller squads fitting a broader array of less-stacked buffs. These modules should be as easy to fit as a salvager. This gives the soloist just a smidge of advantage over a gang-fit ship that has been separated from its allies.
I also like the idea of mixed fleets, with larger ships being tanky and supplying fire support with lighter hulls supplying the tactical superiority. For these ships, I like the idea of heavier ships conferring defensive bonuses to their tenders. The concept of sensor integrity naturally lends itself to the idea of a fleet. In the RP sense, you might rely on a shared sensor net up to the point that you are completely jammed out. This makes a lot of sense for ships that are on the field together. |

FireFrenzy
Satan's Unicorns
321
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 07:40:33 -
[37] - Quote
maybe make it targetted instead of bubble? Should save alot on the server side?
That should allow it to fit in a utility high and allow you to turn off the boosts right before your f1 monkeys paste the guys with their 1400s |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |