Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cearain
Goose Swarm Coalition
1393
|
Posted - 2015.10.12 14:34:32 -
[91] - Quote
Sorry trolls I am not going to keep reposting the questions.
The evidence that players are dissatisfied is pretty clear from reading the forums and blogs on eve. For example one of the most upvoted proposals that has yet to be addressed by ccp is to put boosts on grid. But hey, keep ignoring the evidence and pretending you didn't know players think this is broken.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1531
|
Posted - 2015.10.12 14:37:21 -
[92] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Sorry trolls I am not going to keep reposting the questions.
The evidence that players are dissatisfied is pretty clear from reading the forums and blogs on eve. For example one of the most upvoted proposals that has yet to be addressed by ccp is to put boosts on grid. But hey, keep ignoring the evidence and pretending you didn't know players think this is broken.
You not liking an answer is not the same as not answering the question.
Up-votes are not a great metric. Show me where to down-vote this post and we will see how it turns out.
Removing boosts completely would be vastly preferable to putting them on grid. But i and many others thing that just putting them on killmails while giving them weapon and suspect timers would be a great place for OGB to be. I agree with the complaint that boosts are too safe atm. Removing expensive ships from space would be regrettable imo, but putting boosts in the hands of only those in the more powerful blobs by putting them on grid is a terrible proposition.
I can understand that it wouldnt bother you to see gang warfare balance be further pushed to favor the larger entities since all you want to do is fly around ganking newbs in your t1 frig and complain about everything. |
Cearain
Goose Swarm Coalition
1393
|
Posted - 2015.10.12 15:02:58 -
[93] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Cearain wrote:Sorry trolls I am not going to keep reposting the questions.
The evidence that players are dissatisfied is pretty clear from reading the forums and blogs on eve. For example one of the most upvoted proposals that has yet to be addressed by ccp is to put boosts on grid. But hey, keep ignoring the evidence and pretending you didn't know players think this is broken. Crosi Wesdo wrote: You not liking an answer is not the same as not answering the question.
You dancing around a question is not the same as answering it. Again feel free to quote the question you are supposedly answering and put your answer under it. Crosi Wesdo wrote: Up-votes are not a great metric. Show me where to down-vote this post and we will see how it turns out.
While I agree upvotes are not a good metric, the fact that this is one of the most upvoted proposals should mean something. As far as down votes a person can always say "no" in a post below or say "it's a bad idea" and upvoting that is effectively downvoting the proposal. But regardless of upvotes there has been lots of well thought out arguments presented by plenty players and even devs that the current mechanic is bad. Only a few players who have learned to rely on the crutch argue the absurd position that it is actually healthy for the game. [quote=Crosi Wesdo] Removing boosts completely would be vastly preferable to putting them on grid. But i and many others think that just putting them on killmails while giving them weapon and suspect timers would be a great place for OGB to be. I agree with the complaint that boosts are too safe atm. Removing expensive ships from space would be regrettable imo, but putting boosts in the hands of only those in the more powerful blobs by putting them on grid is a terrible proposition. I can understand that it wouldnt bother you to see gang warfare balance be further pushed to favor the larger entities since all you want to do is fly around ganking newbs in your t1 frig and complain about everything.
It seems you like "group" play when it is defined as one guy flying a bunch of his own alts, but when the "group" is actual human beings playing together you are all for nerfing that style of play. I suggest you are the one trying to defend a much more niche style of gameplay than I am.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1531
|
Posted - 2015.10.12 15:03:49 -
[94] - Quote
When did i want to nerf any type of group play? |
Oddsodz
Rifterlings Zero.Four Ops
167
|
Posted - 2015.10.12 15:07:56 -
[95] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
And i didnt say people dont complain about how eve is unfair. I just said that i dont personally know of anyone who has actually cited boosts as any sort of reason for them quitting.
I am saddened to say than I know of 1 player who has took an extended break from Ever due to the Links meta. Sard Cade (think that's how you spell his name.) And 2 more that are slowly losing the will to play due to links being needed just to compete let alone win a fight with skill instead of links. One of them is Finture. I have seen that he is slowly playing less and less. And the other is Sir Scweebles. The word I hear from a friend of a friend of a friend is that he has been away and not playing Eve due to general burn out after the AT13 Torny plus the need to have links all the time.
I Too have been playing less and less due to Links. The fact that I need them now just to even fight a so called solo Atron that has links in a novice FW site is just plain wrong to me.
Lets also talk about how unfulfilling it is to fly a t3 as a link ship in a fleet? I did this a few weeks ago for somebody and it is the most lame role in the game. This is why it a alt job. There is no fun too it. Now flying a command ship on grid as a link ship is more than doable and is fun. My Fleet support Eos is great fun to fly in a fleet. Is it the optimum way to fly links? No. Having a alt do it is better for the fleet. When that has changed. I may come back to more PvP in Eve.
But I digress. I still hope that somebody in CCP can come up with some nice stats with graph porn for us about how I did in the last 12 months.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1531
|
Posted - 2015.10.12 16:05:21 -
[96] - Quote
So because 2-3 guys dont have as much fun dunking scrubs because they keep running into better prepared foes that have boosts and dunk them, we have to steamroll over all gang and fleet warfare?
I would guess that the effect that OGB is having on a few people who for some reason think solo is a good thing would pale into insignificance when faced with every fleet member coming to the realisation that overnight they will need twice the number of logi to tank what they did the day before. Even then they will get alphad a lot easier.
Or they will have to cart a commandship around with them which they will lose in every single engagement because suddenly bored hotdroppers / 3rd parties or just bigger fleets will get a nice killmail out of even a silly cruiser fleet.
Pretty sure that will annoy more than just a few random dudes. |
Oddsodz
Rifterlings Zero.Four Ops
167
|
Posted - 2015.10.12 17:48:33 -
[97] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:So because 2-3 guys dont have as much fun dunking scrubs because they keep running into better prepared foes that have boosts and dunk them, we have to steamroll over all gang and fleet warfare?
lol, Alas, I feel that you are a little behind here. The above stated pilots constantly dunked all the things links or not. Just go watch some of their past streams on twitch. But they like myself are sick of the fact that they HAVE to have links or they can not compete at all. In the case of Fintrue. He does not use links that much. But he choses to deadspace/faction snake fit all his ships (he has a rich sugar daddy that gives him lots of ISK to PvP with) just so he can even compete/engaged with a simple t2 fit gang. If it was not for all the ISK he has at hand., He, I think would have stopped playing long ago as he like me knows that if the target has links and you don't, Then no matter how good a pilot you are. You will not win a fight ever. And all because they have links. This is wrong.
Also, With no way to bait a t3 booster, Nobody is willing to spend the time needed to try and catch one. And the fact that they just sit on a gate/station and are completely safe 99.99999 of the time is just plain bad. To find a t3 booster in a safe spot takes 3 pilots and a set of virtues implants in a perfect maxed skilled prober and a lot of luck that the t3 does not cloak/warp when he sees your probes on D-scan when you go to tackle it. So much work/effort that is not fun.
Links on grid means that they are at risk. Risk is good. I myself would love to see warfare links get a buff so long as they are on grid and at risk.
My wish list for command ships with links is
- Make them only work on gird/range 100km -whatever the DEVs think is best
- Let them fit target spectrum breakers.
- Let them have a spin up bonus to Micro Jump Drive to get out of harm's way faster
- Remove t3 links altogether
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1532
|
Posted - 2015.10.12 18:25:33 -
[98] - Quote
Well, those suggestions would have a massive impact on small/medium gang and many fleet doctrines and just about all of the pvping playerbase while also making nano gangs far weaker to the point of non-viability in some cases.
Just so a vocal minority can move on to complaining about how implants are too low-risk for their benefits.
If these people feel forced to use boosts i would ask why?
Theres not THAT many boosts around. I suspect they use boosts for the same reason as most people do. They want the advantage. Turning round later and saying they dont want to use boosts any more but are unwilling to suffer the inevitable drop in success rate? So everyone else has to stop using boosts too, even those in logi fleets or those fighting alpha fleets, or those in cruisers, those that cant afford a new commandship every time someone 3rd parties or hot drops their fleet and so on...
Just because this small handful of scrubs want some meaningless and inconsequential solo to be fairer. |
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
318
|
Posted - 2015.10.12 20:28:42 -
[99] - Quote
This thread is garbage.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=331004 - thank me later
|
Oddsodz
Rifterlings Zero.Four Ops
167
|
Posted - 2015.10.13 00:52:36 -
[100] - Quote
Nobody is complaining about implants. Implants are at risk, Just ask Santo.....
I am sorry Crosi, But you are wrong about it just being a "Just so a vocal minority". in fact I don't know a single pilot that would want to keep links off grid.
But I guess we move in different groups.
Anyway,. I will ask you kindly to move along from this thread. It is clear to all that you don't wish to see links moved to on grid only. And that is your right to think that way. I think your point of view is very clear. And this is not a thread discuss the pros and cons of links on or off grid. That has been done to death already. This is a thread about how links have been used in the last 12 months in regards to my combat performance (or lack of performance).
So again I will ask very kindly if CCP would be so kind to come up with my requested info.
Thanks for reading.
Oddsodz |
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1532
|
Posted - 2015.10.13 14:52:36 -
[101] - Quote
Since there is no chance of CCP giving you what you asked i thought you were joking and used the thread to counter the impulse that people have towards putting boosts on grid, as though that would be better for the game.
No boosts at all would be better than boosts on grid. By far. Short of a complete overhaul of related mods and hulls. |
Ares Desideratus
Minmatar Brotherhood Ushra'Khan
272
|
Posted - 2015.10.13 16:19:01 -
[102] - Quote
Removing links completely from game is the best case scenario, but of course it will not happen because they've already been in game for too long so people think they are somehow necessary for the game even though they are actually completely unnecessary.
Putting links on grid is a bad idea because it won't change much other than soloers won't be able to bring their T3s with them (they could but it would be much riskier and more difficult). Fleets would still have links the majority of the time so the problem would be practically unchanged.
Putting links on KMs is actually a good idea because killboards are good for one thing only and that is intel, so that would be a useful change for sure. But that by itself is not nearly enough, and weapon and suspect timers do next to nothing because you can just sit in safe spot and cloak and the problem remains practically unchanged.
Links must be removed from game, or nerfed into the ground. Or, altered in such a way that they have a dynamic role that requires active participation, but still nerfed because their bonuses are over-powered pieces of crap. |
Austneal
Nero Fazione End of Life
92
|
Posted - 2015.10.13 18:14:17 -
[103] - Quote
Oddsodz wrote:So again I will ask very kindly if CCP would be so kind to come up with my requested info.
Do you honestly think they're going to do this for you?
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
821
|
Posted - 2015.10.13 19:43:13 -
[104] - Quote
Austneal wrote:Oddsodz wrote:So again I will ask very kindly if CCP would be so kind to come up with my requested info. Do you honestly think they're going to do this for you?
Didn't you get the memo? This generation of kids believes they are entitled to everything without any kind of work involved. |
Oddsodz
Rifterlings Zero.Four Ops
169
|
Posted - 2015.10.13 22:34:31 -
[105] - Quote
Hey, Nobody said I could not ask. And until CPP come along and say yes or no, I feel I can ask all I like. Won't hurt anybody thats for for sure. |
Cearain
Goose Swarm Coalition
1394
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 13:21:26 -
[106] - Quote
It is very unlikely that CCP would give one player more intel than any others. I would be interested in the actual statistics of how much more often ogbs are used - especially in faction war plex fights. Although I want to know this information it would be idiotic for ccp to publicize this information, if the in fact the use is on the rise. So I hope they keep it secret.
I know op said that people beat to death whether ogb is good or bad. But I had actually never heard that ogb must stay otherwise logi won't be as effective. That Crosi would argue that as a reason to keep ogb just shows how differently he views the game.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Ares Desideratus
Minmatar Brotherhood Ushra'Khan
272
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 13:41:10 -
[107] - Quote
Cearain wrote: I know op said that people beat to death whether ogb is good or bad. But I had actually never heard that ogb must stay otherwise logi won't be as effective. That Crosi would argue that as a reason to keep ogb just shows how differently he views the game.
Can't help but feel that he wants links to stay so he can fly around in zero tank Garmur and kill noobs. Logis don't have anything to do with it, if links were removed today they would be fine. Links make everything better not just logis. They're seriously the dumbest part of this game. Remove them and worst case scenario you have to buff logistics afterwards. It would still be better in the long run. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
821
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 14:06:05 -
[108] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:Cearain wrote: I know op said that people beat to death whether ogb is good or bad. But I had actually never heard that ogb must stay otherwise logi won't be as effective. That Crosi would argue that as a reason to keep ogb just shows how differently he views the game.
Can't help but feel that he wants links to stay so he can fly around in zero tank Garmur and kill noobs. Logis don't have anything to do with it, if links were removed today they would be fine. Links make everything better not just logis. They're seriously the dumbest part of this game. Remove them and worst case scenario you have to buff logistics afterwards. It would still be better in the long run.
Dude, you do know there are links that increase your resists and remount reps, right? I guess those would have nothing to do with the effectiveness of Logi, eh? In fact, information links allow Logi to lock quicker and provide a boost to the ECCM mods. Skirmish links reduce Logi sig radius making them harder to hit, and increase their AB/MWD speed so they can better keep up with the fleet. Yeah, links make Logi super effective. So much so, that most Incursion fleets won't run without them.
You all continue to look at this in the realm of "solo" pvp in FW. You seem to forget that OGBs are used by miners, mission runners, and Incursioners. So in your quest to fix your way of playing the game, you seem to be leaving out everyone else. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1532
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 14:22:32 -
[109] - Quote
Cearain wrote:It is very unlikely that CCP would give one player more intel than any others. I would be interested in the actual statistics of how much more often ogbs are used - especially in faction war plex fights. Although I want to know this information it would be idiotic for ccp to publicize this information, if the in fact the use is on the rise. So I hope they keep it secret.
I know op said that people beat to death whether ogb is good or bad. But I had actually never heard that ogb must stay otherwise logi won't be as effective. That Crosi would argue that as a reason to keep ogb just shows how differently he views the game.
Yes, i like all pvp from micro to macro. You pretty much want the game balanced for solo play and all other scales be damned. |
Arla Sarain
671
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 15:15:15 -
[110] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Cearain wrote:It is very unlikely that CCP would give one player more intel than any others. I would be interested in the actual statistics of how much more often ogbs are used - especially in faction war plex fights. Although I want to know this information it would be idiotic for ccp to publicize this information, if the in fact the use is on the rise. So I hope they keep it secret.
I know op said that people beat to death whether ogb is good or bad. But I had actually never heard that ogb must stay otherwise logi won't be as effective. That Crosi would argue that as a reason to keep ogb just shows how differently he views the game. Yes, i like all pvp from micro to macro. You pretty much want the game balanced for solo play and all other scales be damned. That's hardly fair considering that the odds of a solo/small gang fight erupting spontaneously is much higher than the probability of a large scale fight happening.
Coincidentally, solo/small gang fights is where links become the dominant determinator of the outcome and not having them is hardly a "choice".
How badly would it impact large fleets? Hard to imagine it would absolutely crush them. Or even make them boring. Or even scratch them.
Shamelessly avoiding the subject of Incursions. Pretty sure there was a time when they were run without links; that and the common opinion that Incursions generally need a nerf in their own right considering the risk taken for the wealth attained. |
|
Ares Desideratus
Minmatar Brotherhood Ushra'Khan
272
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 15:29:50 -
[111] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:
Dude, you do know there are links that increase your resists and remount reps, right? I guess those would have nothing to do with the effectiveness of Logi, eh? In fact, information links allow Logi to lock quicker and provide a boost to the ECCM mods. Skirmish links reduce Logi sig radius making them harder to hit, and increase their AB/MWD speed so they can better keep up with the fleet. Yeah, links make Logi super effective. So much so, that most Incursion fleets won't run without them.
You all continue to look at this in the realm of "solo" pvp in FW. You seem to forget that OGBs are used by miners, mission runners, and Incursioners. So in your quest to fix your way of playing the game, you seem to be leaving out everyone else.
Links make everything stupidly effective, like, to the point of being ridiculous and over powered.
Just because links make things easier, does not mean that they are required.
Removing links, or mercilessly nerfing them, would not only fix solo PvP, it would fix PvP throughout all areas of the game. If you think that links are required use for any part of this game, you're seriously mistaken. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1532
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 16:01:14 -
[112] - Quote
Asking null to get used to having to be undocked and active throughout their prime time to defend their space hasnt worked out well because its a culture shock.
Asking people to expect for their reps to never hold on t1 cruisers, or even to expect to live long enough to get a rep cycle off in 15v15 fights. Asking people to be happy that 3rd parties can just warp in 3-5 alpha nados and pretty much 1 shot any cruiser off field. Its the culture shock thats the problem. Not the fact that people will just die much easier.
The other problem is that pirates who dont really fly anything smaller than commandships / t3's can quite happily keep their booster on field, Anything smaller in hull-size or just smaller in numbers than the local easy-mode powerbocks will have a great price to pay in replacing a commandship pretty much at the will of 3rd parties.
Now i appreciate that most of the whiners on here just fly kestrels and looks for low sp targets. But to make that entry level pvp fairer you are impacting a far greater number of people.
Though as i have said. I cant imagine how a nano fleet can ever expect to have boosts on field. Unless the hulls and modules are rebuilt from scratch. |
Thanatos Marathon
Black Fox Marauders
527
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 16:53:43 -
[113] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Asking null to get used to having to be undocked and active throughout their prime time to defend their space hasnt worked out well because its a culture shock.
Asking people to expect for their reps to never hold on t1 cruisers, or even to expect to live long enough to get a rep cycle off in 15v15 fights. Asking people to be happy that 3rd parties can just warp in 3-5 alpha nados and pretty much 1 shot any cruiser off field. Its the culture shock thats the problem. Not the fact that people will just die much easier.
The other problem is that pirates who dont really fly anything smaller than commandships / t3's can quite happily keep their booster on field, Anything smaller in hull-size or just smaller in numbers than the local easy-mode powerbocks will have a great price to pay in replacing a commandship pretty much at the will of 3rd parties.
Now i appreciate that most of the whiners on here just fly kestrels and looks for low sp targets. But to make that entry level pvp fairer you are impacting a far greater number of people.
Though as i have said. I cant imagine how a nano fleet can ever expect to have boosts on field. Unless the hulls and modules are rebuilt from scratch.
Nano BC with warfare link, woot!
P.S. I gave in and started training a combat booster again last night :p |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1532
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 17:23:42 -
[114] - Quote
Drake fleets have always been viable with OGB, but are not exactly what i would call nano.
Ishtars, cerbs, crapacals etc all are far too fast and fragile to be supported by a claymore. |
Portmanteau
oooh ponies
77
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 18:15:20 -
[115] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:So because 2-3 guys Note the disingenuous implication that it's literally only 2-3 people who don't like links
Quote: dont have as much fun dunking scrubs Note the ironic accusation of dunking outmatched/unskillful players when a cursory glance at the poster's KB reveals he enjoys dunking frigates in a linked faction fit Garmur
Quote:we have to steamroll over all gang and fleet warfare? Note the assumption that any change to links (from the current status quo that the poster enjoys for solo frigate dunking) would automatically be a holocaust for all small gang/ fleet warfare, when the poster (or anyone else) doesn't actually know for sure what form this change will take.
Quote:I would guess that the effect that OGB is having on a few people who for some reason think solo is a good thing would pale into insignificance when faced with every fleet member coming to the realisation that overnight they will need twice the number of logi to tank what they did the day before. Even then they will get alphad a lot easier. Note the change in style of language when describing the effects of changing links for fleet warfare.. suddenly it's "every fleet member" ...every member of a single fleet ? Every fleet member in the known universe ? Quite a contrast to the disingenuously limited description of 2-3 solers who don't like links.
Crosi, your apocalyptic fearmongering about what will happen to fleet/gang warfare if links move on grid are a) baseless since nobody other than CCP and perhaps the CSM really knows what the change will be be and b) predicated on a false implication that fleet/gang warfare didn't happen routinely and without problems before OGB became the norm... let me assure you (as if you didn't actually know)...it did. Before off grid tengus/claymores/lokis or what ever, solo fights happened, blobs blobbed and ship exploded everywhere with great frequency. Many changes to ships and mechanics have happened over the years, pvp endured as it will endure any change to links. This change is coming and you need to HTFU and get used to the idea.
Disclaimer : I don't use links, I still pvp anyway, I solo almost 100% of the time, I don't mind dunking noobs and farmers as well as other pvpers. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1532
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 18:35:46 -
[116] - Quote
1, Yes that is disingenuous. Not many people are quitting because of OGB though mate.
2. Ill take fights against low sp toons. Ill also take fights ridiculously outnumbered. Barely any of those kills you see on my killboard were solo targets. usually im warping into well over a dozen targets.
3. Im not being apocalyptic. The advocates for putting boosts on grid in this thread are literally saying that OGB are a very large reason why eve is dying. Im just saying that changes to boosts will negatively effect a lot more people than the small kernel of soloists who quit the game ages ago because they chose what was ultimately a boring a vacuous play style.
Im not saying fights wont happen, im just saying they will be a lot shorter and less rewarding on the fleet level. Tendencies to fly with lots more logisitics and an arbitrary buff to alpha fleets if their target decides to not field a commandship with their t1 cruiser gang. Let alone the fact that there is simply no commandships that can boost on grid for a shield nano cruiser gang.
All im saying, is that the majority of players are silent on this topic. They will be effected negatively as much if not more than the benefits to the handful of vocal soloishts.
The question is, when they are getting vaporised on field like no properly readied fleet has for many years are they going to look forward tot he next fleet where they will again just get vaporised with no hope of reps in any decent sized fight?
I can see from your killboard that you are just another kestrel / tormentor pilot. Not to belittle your place in eve but wanting the game balanced with such inconsequential pvp in mind is very short sighted. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
821
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 18:36:27 -
[117] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:Estella Osoka wrote:
Dude, you do know there are links that increase your resists and remount reps, right? I guess those would have nothing to do with the effectiveness of Logi, eh? In fact, information links allow Logi to lock quicker and provide a boost to the ECCM mods. Skirmish links reduce Logi sig radius making them harder to hit, and increase their AB/MWD speed so they can better keep up with the fleet. Yeah, links make Logi super effective. So much so, that most Incursion fleets won't run without them.
You all continue to look at this in the realm of "solo" pvp in FW. You seem to forget that OGBs are used by miners, mission runners, and Incursioners. So in your quest to fix your way of playing the game, you seem to be leaving out everyone else.
Links make everything stupidly effective, like, to the point of being ridiculous and over powered. Just because links make things easier, does not mean that they are required. Removing links, or mercilessly nerfing them, would not only fix solo PvP, it would fix PvP throughout all areas of the game. If you think that links are required use for any part of this game, you're seriously mistaken.
There is no fixing "Solo PVP" in a MMO. Expecting guaranteed solo PVP in a Massively Multiplayer Online game is just stupid. |
Portmanteau
oooh ponies
77
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 18:51:41 -
[118] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:1, Yes that is disingenuous. Not many people are quitting because of OGB though mate.
2. Ill take fights against low sp toons. Ill also take fights ridiculously outnumbered. Barely any of those kills you see on my killboard were solo targets. usually im warping into well over a dozen targets.
3. Im not being apocalyptic. The advocates for putting boosts on grid in this thread are literally saying that OGB are a very large reason why eve is dying. Im just saying that changes to boosts will negatively effect a lot more people than the small kernel of soloists who quit the game ages ago because they chose what was ultimately a boring a vacuous play style.
Im not saying fights wont happen, im just saying they will be a lot shorter and less rewarding on the fleet level. Tendencies to fly with lots more logisitics and an arbitrary buff to alpha fleets if their target decides to not field a commandship with their t1 cruiser gang. Let alone the fact that there is simply no commandships that can boost on grid for a shield nano cruiser gang.
All im saying, is that the majority of players are silent on this topic. They will be effected negatively as much if not more than the benefits to the handful of vocal soloishts.
The question is, when they are getting vaporised on field like no properly readied fleet has for many years are they going to look forward tot he next fleet where they will again just get vaporised with no hope of reps in any decent sized fight?
I can see from your killboard that you are just another kestrel / tormentor pilot. Not to belittle your place in eve but wanting the game balanced with such inconsequential pvp in mind is very short sighted.
If links stay the same I'll continue as I always do, not an issue for me really, I just find it funny that you imply that fleet and gang warfare will be seriously impaired by on grid links.. it won't, it will just e different, just as it was before links were a thing... surely you cannot dispute that fleet/gang pvp happened without any major problems before links were the norm ?
Thing is, you also imply that it's just us soloers that think OGB is a bad mechanic. Again you are being disingenuous, pvpers from all disciplines recognise it as such, you only have to look at discussions on reddit/failheap/blogs and these forums to see it's far from just a few solo kestrel pilots.
I don't think eve is dying due to links, I don't even know if it's dying. I do think CCP (if you've read the CSM minutes) recognise OGB as a bad mechanic, un EvElike in risk reward. I agree, not just because I like to solo, I have done that despite the prevalence of links for years. It's just a shite mechanic and it's going to get changed... and you know, pvp in all it's forms will survive just as it did before the prevalence of links.
But by all means Crosi ... rage against the dying of the light, just do it more honestly.
|
Ares Desideratus
Minmatar Brotherhood Ushra'Khan
275
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 18:59:47 -
[119] - Quote
I understand what you're saying, Estella. I've always said that "solo" PvP is just a myth, because any PvP by definition requires at least two players in participation to qualify as PvP. You can't PvP all by yourself. Of course, when people say "solo PvP", what they mean is just a lone player fighting against other player(s). (usually outnumbered, against The Blob, etc)
All you've done just now is taken a couple words of what I said and attacked it out of context. There is no fixing solo PvP because solo PvP does not need fixing, it is alive and well and one of the greatest aspects of this game. Overall PvP in general is very good, there are problems with ship balance (as always, various ships are above, various ships are below) but overall it's decent.
The one big problem in Eve PvP is OGBs. All aspects of Eve would benefit from nerfing OGBs. Well, maybe Incursions would be a little tougher, maybe Incursions need fixing anyway, but OGBs are terrible and everyone knows it. The change is coming. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1532
|
Posted - 2015.10.14 19:09:05 -
[120] - Quote
Fleets will be massively effected by on grid boosting. There are people that we cant fight without having links. They will have theirs safely on field behind layers of potential triage and slowcat escalations, while ours will be on grid for them to drop 2 dreads on and vaoprise it in full knowledge that if we escalate they can just drop 40 supers and 10 titans on it. Thats assuming they dont massively outclass us with subcaps and blap the booster with those. Either way that one obvious kill folds the rest of our fleet.
Often we use smaller hulls to fight smaller numbers of bigger ships, like assault frigates vs cruisers/battlecruisers or battleships. Now separate to the question of if that should be viable, it currently is with boosters and far less so without them due to lower risists/buffer and sig. There is no on grid booster than can realistically support such a doctrine. unless all fights return to gates like the days of old.
Personally i like the fighting away from gates. It was always very tedious waiting for the other side to take the gate guns. Couple on grid boosts with weapons timers though and what you have is a huge rift between the larger bodies who arnt really risking their commandship in their 80 man abso fleet, and everyone else who just inst willing to lose a commandship in every 15v15 cruiser fight.
TL;DR - The largest alliances will not be effected but boosts on grid. Smaller groups will seldom field them. Thus gap between them increases insurmountably. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |