I still remember when I was a noon and when I was getting better without links and when I was finally decent without links.

The one thing that kept me in the game was joining a player Corp in FW. I am a 20p8 player that took a 4 year break because I never got engaged with the player base beyond getting dunked because I had no clue what I was doing.

I will readily admit that the SP gap between new and older payers can be and is a big turn off. There is a reason my newer alt does not do much beyond probe and train skills. With that being said, the SP gap is not in my opinion the biggest gap. The biggest gap is the skill aspect in the pilot themselves. There is a steep learning curve to transitioning from scrub level noob to decent pilot. The faster you progress that the easier and more enjoyable the game becomes. The only way to accelerate that learning curve is to get engaged with the player base and go fly with reckless abandon. No amount of off grid vs on grid vs with vs without links will change that ever.

The game needs a player driven solution to attract and retain newer players while they progress the learning curve. Until that improves nothing will change except the gap between new and old players.

The SP gap was less of a turn off than finding out I needed to buy a second account to be competitive.

...

Nevertheless, when/if CCP decide to remove OGB's.
Will they kindly reimburse everyone (including myself)...

...all the time,isk and skill points that we put into the game training up an alt (millions of alts in Crosi's case)

just so we could solo pvp better?

As i have said before, new players die to almost everyone, boosts or not. Boosts have very little impact on player retention. .

The only way to cultivate a healthy eve player base is to give people an easy avenue into player centric activities. Once they learn from other players how eve works they can explore the rest of the possibilities by themselves.

In which case, right, we don't need off grid boosters.

You can make the case for off grid boosters by proving that they are of no consequence, but if you do then it is only intellectually honesty that requires that you do not complain when they are nerfed.

Stop with the nonsense, please.

We agree furiously.

I would also note that individuals using alts is very far away from "player centric activities".

Eve is a group game, and new players should always be encouraged to meet and make friends.

And to bring new folks they know (and can trust) to their corp.

Wow, what a thread. OGB are a horribly abused mechanic, however moving them on-grid is not a fix. All this will do is encourage the larger side in fleet fights and raise the bar to fighting to "if I cannot alpha a linked, boosted, CS off the field, I cannot fight". If one side doesn't meet this criteria, there will be no fights because this means the side that can alpha a CS (the more powerful side) gets to use links while the other side does not. This tips the balance of power even more towards the larger fleet.

What we have today is FAR better as the barrier to entry to get a cloaky T3 booster is fairly low. If CCP doesn't like the way links work, they should just flat out delete them from the game. Moving them on-grid with no other changes is a knee-jerk reaction that is actually worse than what we have now.

And i can fix your subscription model argument by telling you that my alt is just a friend.

Links on grid is just one change amongst a larger effort to reshape pvp on the grid, viewing it in isolation is misleading. For example, links are on grid but the new grid is ******* huge, I don't see any reason why your CS has to be fit in the style of "hah im a brick" and sit @ 0. Probing changes, grid size, AOE MJD and other new AOE weapons inbound, links on grid etc. are all part of a goal to bring more relevance to the grid in a tactical sense.

What we currently have is sit boosts off grid or on station, anchor up, F1. What we will have is more options and more tactical depth, do you want to brawl in heavy armor, sacrificing relative grid mobility and likely having to settle for a damnation sitting with the fleet? Or do you want to take a ranged shield fleet with a nano Nighthawk? Perhaps you will go with quick aligning/always aligned booster sat @ 7,000km off the fight with a couple of anti-tackle ships in support? Perhaps you will go with two aligned boosters @ 7,000km in seperate groups. Perhaps you decide to add redundancy to your fleet and have less obvious ships running gang links spread through out the fleet.

Sounds like more choice, more tactical depth, more relevance of your entire fleets positioning and more engaging gameplay, perfect counters to Anchored Blob N+1. We might even reach the point where a real person makes a better booster/command ship driver than an alt.

Boosts are not god mode.

Also, i do not have an alt, i have a friend that i fly with all the time. I hope this alleviates your concerns.

Yes, CCP say your possible solution to having links far away on a huge grid by explaining that they will most likely work inside a small AOE. RIP skirmish gangs (apart from with t2 dessy pending details)

Not to mention that trying to have on-grid-boosts away from fleet not only makes a mockery of the whole concept for these changes but it will simply be too vulnerable to death squads of 3rd parties who can simply harass boosters 5000km away from he fight.

All the proposed changes and new ships have the potential to be an utter mess when combined together in anything but small scale fights. You argue for a deeper strategy, but i would suggest that what you will get is unpredictable uncertainty instead.

Boosts are not god mode.

Also, i do not have an alt, i have a friend that i fly with some time. I hope this alleviates your concerns.

Skirmish gangs don't require links unless you're terrible.

Get over it link boy. You will have to learn to pvp properly or go mission it out in high sec

Links on grid is just one change amongst a larger effort to reshape pvp on the grid, viewing it in isolation is misleading. For example, links are on grid but the new grid is ******* huge, I don't see any reason why your CS has to be fit in the style of "hah im a brick" and sit @ 0. Probing changes, grid size, AOE MJD and other new AOE weapons inbound, links on grid etc. are all part of a goal to bring more relevance to the grid in a tactical sense.

What we currently have is sit boosts off grid or on station, anchor up, F1. What we will have is more options and more tactical depth, do you want to brawl in heavy armor, sacrificing relative grid mobility and likely having to settle for a damnation sitting with the fleet? Or do you want to take a ranged shield fleet with a nano Nighthawk? Perhaps you will go with quick aligning/always aligned booster sat @ 7,000km off the fight with a couple of anti-tackle ships in support? Perhaps you will go with two aligned boosters @ 7,000km in seperate groups. Perhaps you decide to add redundancy to your fleet and have less obvious ships running gang links spread through out the fleet.

Sounds like more choice, more tactical depth, more relevance of your entire fleets positioning and more engaging gameplay, perfect counters to Anchored Blob N+1. We might even reach the point where a real person makes a better booster/command ship driver than an alt.

From the guy with 100 kills in over half a decade lol.

There really should be a filter on this forum that checks people actually pvp before they are allowed to comment on pvp lol. The number of non-forum alts with strong opinions on pvp with no combat record is astounding.

In reality, what i will have to do is just blob up to fight blobs since taking other options away leaves less choice for engagement styles.

I love watching these beta males cry about their precious ogb :)