| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
SpaceSquirrels
23
   |
Posted - 2011.12.09 17:51:00 -
[31] - Quote
Julia Connor wrote:Switching boosts to ongrid will make the t3 boosting sub useless.
Or I dunno require you to fit only one boost and then fitting an actual tank and guns, instead of filling lows with co processors or sensor boosters to avoid being probed out.
So make it a mini field command.
Anyway off grid boosting is BS. They should allow it, but not inside a POS and only gives out .5-1% bonuses. While on grid gives the full. |
Mfume Apocal
Origin.
Black Legion.
153
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 18:54:00 -
[32] - Quote
SpaceSquirrels wrote:Or I dunno require you to fit only one boost and then fitting an actual tank and guns, instead of filling lows with co processors or sensor boosters to avoid being probed out.
So make it a mini field command.
It will have a worse tank than the command ships since the link sub has no resist or buffer bonuses. |
SpaceSquirrels
23
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 20:18:00 -
[33] - Quote
^
Oh well? Trade off for better bonus? Is that what this game is about?
Gives more reason for the extreme amount of time to be able to pilot CS's. |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army
148
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 20:36:00 -
[34] - Quote
Fleet Command Ships (Vulture, Damnation, Claymore, Eos) are only useful for offensive actions where you expect to jump into the enemy with them already on grid. For all other gang boosting purposes you are better off with T3s. As to Field Commands - they occupy a nice middle area between T1 BCs and T3s... though they're a lot closer to T1 BC than T3. IMO their bang for the buck is quite low.
Bacically - Command Ships aren't quite obsolete, but they're very very close.
-Liang
Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?)
Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Zyella Stormborn
Alpha Strategy
In Umbra Mortis
1
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 20:44:00 -
[35] - Quote
Sleipnir and Absolution both give me the sweats when they pop up on my screen still. They are also an absolute ton cheaper in cost than T3's, and are not as big of a target in pvp (although they should be targeted fast imho).
Anyone who says they are obsolete is mistaken. As for fleet boosters, well, its a bit rougher, but as stated above, cost makes a huge difference, and in pvp most people try to go as cheap as they can while still getting as much bang as possible.
Going on the disclosure list: My pvp heavy experience is limited, but I have spent a long time out in low sec, and am only speaking from experience of what I encounter most out there above the frigate-blob-fests. |
Lili Lu
50
|
Posted - 2011.12.09 23:47:00 -
[36] - Quote
Julia Connor wrote:Switching boosts to ongrid will make the t3 boosting sub useless.
No it wouldn't. It would make multiple link T3s useless. A T3s single better boost would have a place in the fleet structure. Its single link would not require any gimping of its tank. On-grid only boosting would actually diversify fleets and make both ships types more important and both used within the fleet.
Fleet command ships are still used as was mentioned by attackers in large fleet actions. Jumping into a system with blobbed gates, or lag on titan bridging after the cyno opens can get a gimped T3 killed. If you look at killboards fleet commands are still used, but a defender with a pos'd up T3 is a stupid mechanic.
In high sec having T3 alts with not much leadership trained (as in wing command or fleet command levels) for vanguard fleets is real let down for folks having trained fleet command ships and those leadership skills. Also, a change to on-grid only boosting would reduce the total dps of vanguard fleets which would increase the completion times and reduce the flow of the isk faucet that is high sec incursions. If those fleets want the links they would have to bring the ship into the site with them.
I think some of the misunderstanding and name-calling at Tipia was because the poster was talking about incursions and Tipia wasn't. Regardless the idea of an off-grid booster is bad game design. Having a totally safe or nearly so important ship such as a fleet booster is allowing less swing in the progress of a battle. Having boosters on grid means they become a possible target, and their loss will be felt. Granted fleet commands are tough nuts to crack as they should be. A one link T3 can be as well if it focusses on tank and not command processors and co-pros.
When you fly a fleet command your fit is centered around your links and tank. Your weapons are next to meaningless. At best small weapons to try to kill or shake a frig tackler. T3s can be set up the same way. After you have fit your 3 links on the FC or 1 link on the T3 you devote grid and/or cpu to tanking (or in the case of a Claymore possibly some agility/speed as well). Eos, I would assume to be the same but I have no experience with it (that has to be one of the rarest used ships in the game, heh).
Field commands have also had their utility diminished by T3s as wel, although not as muchl. But that could not be fixed by on-grid boosting. An Absolution can still favorably compare to a Legion, a Sleipnir to a Loki, a . . . well not so much a Nighthawk to a Tengu (Tengu being such an op ship imo, or in some folks opinion a NH needing an offensive buff). Interesting thing about that any buff to a Nighthawk would have to be done so that it only could be used offensively otherwise bears will just use any buff to increase an already incredible and possibly op tank. I have no experience or knowledge of the Astarte v Proteus.
Commands are not entirely obsolete. But they are near obsolete, due to T3s. Fat chance of nerfing T3 most likely. SO the only thing that can be done by those that want to restore command ships imo is keep requesting on-grid only boosting, to help fleet commands, and maybe some buffs to field commands. |
THXBYE
Elite War Squad
32
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 00:55:00 -
[37] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:I have no idea why anyone would bother with a Fleet Command Ship these days. It is outclassed in its bonuses by T3's (3% vs 5%), unable to do any DPS (especially the Vulture and Damnation), unable to fit 3 links and be unprobeable (except to those who really, really spend big). Plus, well, its no news to anyone the Eos is utterly fail anyway.
The biggest issue I have is the difference in T3 gang links bonuses vs the Command Ship bonuses, when you can jam 3 gang links on a Loki. The command subs are a great idea, but in my humble opinion, if you restrict a Sleipnir to one gang link, why does the T3 get a free ride on them. Yes, FYI, i am aware that this "gimps" the fit of the Loki if it ever somehow gets into combat (ha!).
There's no longer a role or a point in Fleet Command Ships. Just stick your Loki boosting alt in a safe spot, minimise his window or alt-tab out, and be done with it.
Now, over to the trolls.
lmfao
You're not even ******* kidding are you?
Alts brah alts. What the **** you want dps for on a boosting ship?
Ignorant.
Im sorry but you must be called what you are, offenses aside, dont take it as a ***** offense, but as an open-eyes observation.
EDIT: Dam I forgot you were trying to hide a secret here.
Im sorry to let everyone know how to win battles easy pie style with the proper booster.
Universal PvP System Mode: ..default.aspx?g=posts&t=38634
In Game Laws, Fines and Taxes: ..default.aspx?g=posts&t=36124
Stations and NPC Services Costs: ..default.aspx?g=posts&t=39038 |
Mfume Apocal
Origin.
Black Legion.
153
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 02:32:00 -
[38] - Quote
Lili Lu wrote:No it wouldn't. It would make multiple link T3s useless. A T3s single better boost would have a place in the fleet structure. Its single link would not require any gimping of its tank. On-grid only boosting would actually diversify fleets and make both ships types more important and both used within the fleet.
Warfare processor sub replaces the resist, buffer or active tanking subsystem.
|
1-Up Mushroom
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
244
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 03:19:00 -
[39] - Quote
IMO, CS's should get 5% Bonus and T3's should get 3% Bonus. CS's are made for boosting
5 Senses In A Person... 4 Seasons In A Year... 3 Colors In A Stoplight... 2 Poles On The Earth... ONLY 1-UP MUSHROOM!!!-á If You Like My Sig, Like Me! |
Kuhn Arashi
Black Talon Aerospace
Black Watch.
6
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 08:54:00 -
[40] - Quote
Tech 3 boosting ships are pretty balanced I'd say.
Agreeing with many if not most of the points made in favor of this
Tech 3:
Pros:
- Bigger boost bonus
- Easier to train for
- can cloak
- can get away from bubbles
Cons:
- can't survive on the field
- Not Immune outside of a POS anymore
- Adds No DPS to your gang
- No kill mails (if that matters to you)
Fleet Command Ships:
Pros:
- Stays with the fleet, and lives.
- Adds some extra DPS to your fleet
- 1 skill book unlocks all Command Ships
- Kill Mail whoring (again, if that matters)
- can fit more links without gimping your ship
Cons:
- Not as much DPS as a field command, but its meant to link, not gank.
- can't scout, cloak, run away.
- Weaker bonus
- No hiding what kind of ship you are, maybe more likely to get primaried faster?
Did I miss anything? |
Cartheron Crust
Matari Exodus
7
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 10:47:00 -
[41] - Quote
1-Up Mushroom wrote:IMO, CS's should get 5% Bonus and T3's should get 3% Bonus. CS's are made for boosting
Best idea in thread and simple "fix". |
King Rothgar
Autocannons Anonymous
55
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 11:53:00 -
[42] - Quote
Fleet command ships have their uses. Off grid boosting, though powerful, is very limiting. It requires the booster to be in system and at a safespot before the fight starts. That's fine if you're defending a system or know the fight will happen there. But it's no good for roaming or when there is question as to where the fight will actually occur. It's also terribly vulnerable to spies.
On the other hand, on grid boosting CS's can travel with the fleet thus allowing greater mobility and are not subject to attack by spies. And it isn't like they are squishy and instantly primary. Shame on you if you call a damnation primary in anything under a 50 vs 50 fight. That said, the difference in the bonus needs to be eliminated. Either CS's need to be buffed to 5% per lvl or t3's need to be nerfed to 3% per lvl. I also think field CS's should get that same bonus, just to emphasize the fact that they can fit a link while still dealing out some serious pain. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |