| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security
Multicultural F1 Brigade
240
   |
Posted - 2015.11.09 14:03:00 -
[1] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:From a purely impartial perspective. I have to say boosts are awesome.
Made my lunchtime. 
I've no real objection to OGB.
You can argue that they broaden the combat options and profiles as much as they reduce, you have to adapt your engagement choices.
Links may need a bit of balancing and it should be less easy for evasion by the ships providing links. I would like to see the module that gives the "interdiction" range boost reworked to something else.
ie:
1. Reduce the effectiveness of links on T3C
2. Give a weapons timer for link boosters when the ships under their command aggress and remain aggressed.
3. Remove and replace the interdiction skirmish link.
4. Give the same penalties to neutral Booster ships as they do to neutral Logi in High and Low sec.
"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"
|
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security
Multicultural F1 Brigade
243
|
Posted - 2015.11.10 00:11:43 -
[2] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote:
I've no real objection to OGB.
You can argue that they broaden the combat options and profiles as much as they reduce, you have to adapt your engagement choices..
Of course they broaden the options for people using the boosts. Its like saying saying if you pay ccp an extra 15/month so you can fly a t3d in novice plexes. Except your t3d looks like a frigate. For everyone else it limits the options. I used to warp in against kiting ships, hoping to sling shot them. But when links started becoming so prevalent forget it. Even when they warp in on you the crazy low signature and speed means you can't catch them unless you have a fantastic internet connection. Might as well warp off even if you are already in the plex.
They can just pay 15/month for a Recon or a cloaked Griffin.
What is needed is balancing of the off grid booster and make it harder for them to evade combat.
It is too easy to move a T3C fit for links around. The interdiction maneuvers warfare link now needs a change, particularly in the era of garmur, orthrus and with navy EWAR frigs on the way etc..
"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"
|
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security
Multicultural F1 Brigade
243
|
Posted - 2015.11.10 17:07:29 -
[3] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote: Boosters are moving on grid in the fall of 2016.
Ack... my Serendipity is lost
"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"
|
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security
Multicultural F1 Brigade
244
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 13:16:10 -
[4] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Abannans Forum Alt wrote:chances are, the guy who killed you with links would've probably killed you without them too Some of us would relish the opportunity to find out. And some of us seem to be afraid to do so. I'd rather face off against a player's skill than their willingness to spend more dollars on the game. In other news, my corpmates are presently flying a Svipul that, with links has 40k EHP, two neuts, a 45m sig radius, does 4k cold in prop mode and over 400 DPS cold. CCP can't release decent ships because links make them batshit insane.
Yeah, been talking about this sort of thing on comms and the skirmish links need to be smashed into something alternative new. Remove them and lower the % on the armor and siege links (particularly on T3C's).
"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"
|
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security
Multicultural F1 Brigade
246
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 18:16:58 -
[5] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:IbanezLaney wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:
On that day, I shall have my mop and bucket ready to collect the flood of tears from "elite solo pvp'ers" who are trash without their little friend. Or two - give my regards to CAANON.
But you will also not have them on that day - So you will still get dunked. Either way - Your tears will continue to flow. What will you cry about next?? ECM?? Logi?? Fleets?? I get dunked alot; doesn't really bother me. It's part of the game unless you are a hyper risk-averse carebear. I would prefer that when said dunks occur they do so because the opponent possessed superior tactics, speed and knowledge of the game rather than because they give CCP more money every month. "If you take my links I'll just bring a Falcon or logi alt" is a bad argument, as has been duly demonstrated when it's tossed out as a red herring in every single thread on this topic. Suffice to say the risk/reward for those variants of assistance is at a far more appropriate level, for various reasons. (Must be risked on grid, appears on mails, only effective against one or two opponents, etc.) I'm thinking you haven't encountered many Recon ships. As most of us have already said, we would like to have OGBs show up on killmails. Logi too.
And a aggression timer ofc...
"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"
|
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security
Multicultural F1 Brigade
248
|
Posted - 2015.12.10 17:12:22 -
[6] - Quote
IbanezLaney wrote:Arla Sarain wrote:"here have some 30% blanket stat boost cos you were so good at this game that you got an alt".
That argument is not really valid when: I can haul 100% more items if I also use an alt than I can with only my main. I can add 100% more dps to a fight by using an alt and have 100% more to tank on field. So the truth is - links are actually 70% underpowered for the investment.
and in a fleet of 251 your links have a apparent overpowered 750% investment.
It's not on grid or off grid that was the problems but we will have to see what CCP are doing with all the inbound changes to decide whether they are getting some balance.
As "on grid" means many many kilometres, probing will still be required. LOL at all the whine complaining about whine.
The real balancing that is required will be missed, as usual. So T3C boosters in low sec will continue to only die from silly mistakes (sorry Thanatos but that is what I think).
"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"
|
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security
Multicultural F1 Brigade
250
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 14:00:05 -
[7] - Quote
Thanatos Marathon wrote:Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote:
The real balancing that is required will be missed, as usual. So T3C boosters in low sec will continue to only die from silly mistakes (sorry Thanatos but that is what I think).
No worries. I will agree that some of the boosters I've killed have had plenty of opportunities to cloak/move/use a different fit. Some of them though the mistake boils down to not seeing the Tornadoes move or the single pass of the combat probes before they are toast, not much of a mistake imo, just bad luck and/or trying to do to much.
There is no denying your skill and your patience/preparation. You have clearly demonstrated what can be done. However, my point is to show that you are powerless if the links T3C is piloted properly (alright, yes you may force them to cloak, warp or jump and therefore force them to drop the links).
The trouble CCP has is that they have to account for the lowest common denominator; for every Templar Dane (or Crosi) trying to get fights against the odds by using links to level the field or give them an unforeseen advantage you get 5-10 pilots who abuse links in circumstances clearly overpowered.
Perhaps they did not need to be dragged on grid but, I guess CCP made a decision to push novices and smalls back towards the new guys (CD's and Tech II Logi blocked amirite?) and to make it clear links affecting ships in FW plex's obvious?
Cannot help wonder: If they had given the link modules a little reduction in effectiveness (and perhaps replaced the interdiction skirmish module), the T3C's link bonus's a reduction and added an aggression timer, they would have been a long way to finding a good balance.
I
"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"
|
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security
Multicultural F1 Brigade
252
|
Posted - 2015.12.17 09:41:41 -
[8] - Quote
Switch Savage wrote:Well hey skirmish links have to be on grid after this change so scram/point range will drop for most gangs. But we will likely just see HICs in all kiting gangs (Yay 37.5km scram :D).
In Rakapas, the jump gates to Reisato and to Iwisoda are on the same grid. I doubt this is the only occurance.
This allows for the links to be "safe" to an exit that is a warp away whilst still applying the bonus. I am pretty sure the new "on grid links" are going to be gamed effectively just as they have before.
At least Command destroyers are here to completely change the engagement envelope on a number of situations. Damn the Bifost can tank good, if fitted well (o7 St Lucifer).
We have yet to see the true fallout from this change and I suspect I will still approve of balancing passes on all the links and T3C.
"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"
|
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security
Multicultural F1 Brigade
253
|
Posted - 2016.01.03 01:31:56 -
[9] - Quote
So what has actually changed?
1. Effect of boosted attributes from Warfare links: None (yet)
2. Effect to the the attribute bonus's to all the hulls concerned: None
3. Any hulls removed that provide links: none, one hull type added
4. Effect of links to combat inside novices: no longer possible
5. Effect of links to combat inside smalls: no longer possible
6. Effect of links to combat inside mediums: no longer able to provide many links from one hull (so they'll bring Falcons or Rooks that will show on their killboard performance and mark the pilot)
7. Effect of links in limited complexes: change dependent on "allowed ships"
8. Effect of links in other combat circumstances: links need to be within 6000km. Still only vulnerable to high skilled probes and at nullifying effect not at a significant risk of loss.
Without a further change nothing has really happened other than pilots have been denied "elite level" performance in zones theoretically designed for "low entry level" combat.
If they implement area of effect to the modules it may be the wrong choice but, so far there is very little either side should complain about. The prolific and widespread use of links will be reduced because there is now a choice to avoid targets with links in place. However, they still have plenty of options and more fights under their influence will occur outside plex acceleration gates.
I thnk there are some justifiable increase risks from the changes so far. It will be harder to setup links on the move and in unprepared areas (more BMs inbound).
"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"
|
| |
|