Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
30
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 00:00:38 -
[1] - Quote
I'm curious to know what the reasoning behind off grid links is. What possible reason could there be for the existence this mechanic?
I submit that links are fundamentally at odds with PVP, and further that they destroy PVP content by removing a critical part of PVP, which is choosing your fights. Links change the capabilities of ships so much that they effectively destroy the ability of the pilot to know what they are fighting, and what chance they have of survival.
The great problem with links is not that they make ships ridiculously OP. We already have the Worm, the Garmur, Gila, Orthrus, and other seriously OP ships. I concede that they form part of the meta.
But here is the thing: you know, when you see a worm warping in on short D scan, that a worm is coming. You know, when you see an Orthrus and two Svipuls cruising the belts, what to expect.
Links change this completely. You think you face a tech 1 frigate. You have no idea that it has a much better tank than a tech 2 assault frigate, with more DPS, and can easily destroy 3 or 4 unlinked players by itself.
The only way to avoid off grid linked players is to never fight in a system where you don't know exactly where everyone is, or who and what they are. In other words, stay away from any system where there is more than one enemy or neutral, or where you can't see everyone in local on grid.
THAT is what links do for PVP. If you are serious about choosing your fights, those become the rules. Otherwise, your only option is to use off grid links yourself. At that point, PVP becomes inaccessible for new players, and small gangs are massively disadvantaged because they need to pay for an alt.
So, these are the three big problems with off grid links:
1. They destroy the ability to know what you face, and to choose your fights. 2. They completely unbalance PVP, making ships that would die 1 v 1 capable of taking on 3 or 4 enemy with ease. They are not subtle, but rather they are designed to make solo ships essentially invulnerable in small gang pvp. 3. They can't be countered, short of engaging in an arms race that has nothing to do with piloting and everything to do with spending isk, and time, in the pursuit of simple PVP.
I don't want to complain exclusively. We enjoy PVP in FW space, and when you do get fair fights it is great fun.
But let us not ignore the real problems with Eve, and with the culture at CCP. Last week I logged on and jumped into a navy faction frigate, and went to meet my corp 6 systems away. I was insta popped by TWO svipuls at the first gate, then podded.
OK, that happens. Yes, the meta is in a strange place when 2 players can insta pop a tanky ship a class smaller than them., but........ gate "camps" happen.
So then we go out to find a fight, and we come across a triple stabbed Merlin farming a large plex.
Again, we make the sign of the cross and give thanks for a rich ecosystem.
Then we find pirates using links, and baiting folks with an apparently vulnerable Kestrel that can destroy other tech 1 frigates in less than 10 seconds. That means clearing a field of three enemy frigates of the same class in 30 seconds. In other words, before it uses even 1/3 of its tank.
This is Eve game play. This is what FW space has become, due to the pervasive bullying culture at CCP.
The bottom line is this: if you want reasonably balanced fights, or even if you want predictable fights so you can pick and choose your fights (which inherently leads to balanced fights), then there are a whole biunch of folks at CCP who are absolutely against that.
Those folks developed off grid links.
Why?
Why did they do that, and why do they keep trying to make Eve a game where new players just get smashed by senior players using hidden and deeply unfair tactics?
Eve is the only game I can think of where new players are so deliberately disadvantaged compared to the older players. They suffer massive retardation of ability through the skill points system, as well as not having real player skills. On top of all this, senior players have access to better ships, better modules, better implants and, of course, better chances to pay for all of the above.
This is not "amazing" or unique. It is not inspired. It's not just "a hard game".
It's a bully culture, where the older, bigger kids cheat in order to push around the smaller kids.
Maybe CCP have solid commercial reasons for cultivating a bully culture where the established powers thrill to pick on the weakest in their community.
Or maybe this culture is a reflection of the people who founded the organization.
Or, maybe, this culture of abuse evolved on its own, called itself a "sandbox", and nobody has ever seriously tried to get rid of the degenerate personalities who fuel all cultures of abuse.
Thinking specifically of the goons and the Mittani here.
In summary, we should think about WHY off grid links exist, and more importantly WHO at CCP support this kind of mechanic.
It's the only way to change the culture. |
Ares Desideratus
Minmatar Brotherhood Ushra'Khan
290
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 00:17:51 -
[2] - Quote
There are plenty of reasons why OGBs exist, but none of them are good ones. Some will parrot nonsense about links being intrinsic to large fleet warfare, or they will say that "eve isn't supposed to be fair", as if that somehow justifies such an absurd aspect of game design as OGBs, but if you read between the lines it is obvious that most players who defend OGBs are either players who use them on a regular basis and don't want them to go away, or players who are closed-minded and can't think for themselves, so they think that because something exists, then that's the way it should be, and you're the weird one for asking questions. |
RonPaul Rox
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
94
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 02:23:24 -
[3] - Quote
the same reason T2 BPOs exist, if ccp makes a bad decision that will anger people if they fix it, they dont fix it
http://imgur.com/EGjYLSL
|
Yang Aurilen
Conspiracy Theory. Project.Mayhem.
971
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 03:01:19 -
[4] - Quote
Pestilen Ratte wrote:I'm curious to know what the reasoning behind off grid links is. What possible reason could there be for the existence this mechanic?
I submit that links are fundamentally at odds with PVP, and further that they destroy PVP content by removing a critical part of PVP, which is choosing your fights. Links change the capabilities of ships so much that they effectively destroy the ability of the pilot to know what they are fighting, and what chance they have of survival.
The great problem with links is not that they make ships ridiculously OP. We already have the Worm, the Garmur, Gila, Orthrus, and other seriously OP ships. I concede that they form part of the meta.
But here is the thing: you know, when you see a worm warping in on short D scan, that a worm is coming. You know, when you see an Orthrus and two Svipuls cruising the belts, what to expect.
Links change this completely. You think you face a tech 1 frigate. You have no idea that it has a much better tank than a tech 2 assault frigate, with more DPS, and can easily destroy 3 or 4 unlinked players by itself.
The only way to avoid off grid linked players is to never fight in a system where you don't know exactly where everyone is, or who and what they are. In other words, stay away from any system where there is more than one enemy or neutral, or where you can't see everyone in local on grid.
THAT is what links do for PVP. If you are serious about choosing your fights, those become the rules. Otherwise, your only option is to use off grid links yourself. At that point, PVP becomes inaccessible for new players, and small gangs are massively disadvantaged because they need to pay for an alt.
So, these are the three big problems with off grid links:
1. They destroy the ability to know what you face, and to choose your fights. 2. They completely unbalance PVP, making ships that would die 1 v 1 capable of taking on 3 or 4 enemy with ease. They are not subtle, but rather they are designed to make solo ships essentially invulnerable in small gang pvp. 3. They can't be countered, short of engaging in an arms race that has nothing to do with piloting and everything to do with spending isk, and time, in the pursuit of simple PVP.
I don't want to complain exclusively. We enjoy PVP in FW space, and when you do get fair fights it is great fun.
But let us not ignore the real problems with Eve, and with the culture at CCP. Last week I logged on and jumped into a navy faction frigate, and went to meet my corp 6 systems away. I was insta popped by TWO svipuls at the first gate, then podded.
OK, that happens. Yes, the meta is in a strange place when 2 players can insta pop a tanky ship a class smaller than them., but........ gate "camps" happen.
So then we go out to find a fight, and we come across a triple stabbed Merlin farming a large plex.
Again, we make the sign of the cross and give thanks for a rich ecosystem.
Then we find pirates using links, and baiting folks with an apparently vulnerable Kestrel that can destroy other tech 1 frigates in less than 10 seconds. That means clearing a field of three enemy frigates of the same class in 30 seconds. In other words, before it uses even 1/3 of its tank.
This is Eve game play. This is what FW space has become, due to the pervasive bullying culture at CCP.
The bottom line is this: if you want reasonably balanced fights, or even if you want predictable fights so you can pick and choose your fights (which inherently leads to balanced fights), then there are a whole biunch of folks at CCP who are absolutely against that.
Those folks developed off grid links.
Why?
Why did they do that, and why do they keep trying to make Eve a game where new players just get smashed by senior players using hidden and deeply unfair tactics?
Eve is the only game I can think of where new players are so deliberately disadvantaged compared to the older players. They suffer massive retardation of ability through the skill points system, as well as not having real player skills. On top of all this, senior players have access to better ships, better modules, better implants and, of course, better chances to pay for all of the above.
This is not "amazing" or unique. It is not inspired. It's not just "a hard game".
It's a bully culture, where the older, bigger kids cheat in order to push around the smaller kids.
Maybe CCP have solid commercial reasons for cultivating a bully culture where the established powers thrill to pick on the weakest in their community.
Or maybe this culture is a reflection of the people who founded the organization.
Or, maybe, this culture of abuse evolved on its own, called itself a "sandbox", and nobody has ever seriously tried to get rid of the degenerate personalities who fuel all cultures of abuse.
Thinking specifically of the goons and the Mittani here.
In summary, we should think about WHY off grid links exist, and more importantly WHO at CCP support this kind of mechanic.
It's the only way to change the culture.
TL;DR version a linked tengu touched my e-honor?
Post with your NPC alt main and not your main main alt!
|
ALUCARD 1208
Spiritus Draconis Spaceship Bebop
415
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 03:06:23 -
[5] - Quote
woah this thread delivers grrrrr goons and booohoo links all in the same thread
dank/10 would read again
BEBOPS ODE TO PERUNGA
|
Daerrol
Death By Design Did he say Jump
252
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 06:27:36 -
[6] - Quote
I took a newbro friend out. We each had a thrasher. 250mm highs, web, J5B scram, 1mn AB, 2x Gyro in lows. Rigs were collision accelerators.
We roamed bleaks lands for 15 minutes and found a thrasher and jackdaw at a large. We warped in on them, exploded their trasher and he warped out. I died to the jackdaw and the inevitable pile on of people who came in. I was even ECM'd by a kitsune by the end. I self destructed, figuring there was no need to let more whore in on my ship.
Their thrasher was full of loot, so worth 10m, 4m more than my 6m thrasher. Op Success.
|
Verlyn
Sisters of Xambu
43
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 09:22:18 -
[7] - Quote
It's just one of the many reasons why many of us simply leave FW pvp within its own puddle of **** tbh.
However OP, don't try making this into stealth SP complaint thread, please. Thanks. |
ALUCARD 1208
Spiritus Draconis Spaceship Bebop
417
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 12:44:22 -
[8] - Quote
so you guys think that boosts are only used in FW pvp lol.
BEBOPS ODE TO PERUNGA
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1575
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 12:47:02 -
[9] - Quote
From a purely impartial perspective. I have to say boosts are awesome. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
3603
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 12:58:18 -
[10] - Quote
Did the OP really just say that people with links are bullying him? That's pretty special. |
|
Ralph King-Griffin
Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance
12775
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 12:59:12 -
[11] - Quote
Yang Aurilen wrote:
TL;DR version a linked tengu touched my e-honor?
pretty much
Better the Devil you know.
=]|[=
|
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade
240
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 14:03:00 -
[12] - 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"
|
Switch Savage
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
212
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 14:25:56 -
[13] - Quote
Only thing i want is links to have an aggression timer as previously mentioned to get them off stations where they can be probed down and killed.
I can think of only one fight in the last 6 months that I lost because my opponent was linked. It is very possible to work out if someone has links and whether it will change the outcome of the fight before you engage. Fights are mainly won or lost on meta and pilot skill. I can certainly pick out specific examples where links allow you to win fights you would not normally however these are few and far between. |
Bastion Arzi
Angry Mustellid Decayed Orbit
291
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 16:01:25 -
[14] - Quote
Pestilen Ratte wrote: I submit that links are fundamentally at odds with PVP, and further that they destroy PVP content by removing a critical part of PVP, which is choosing your fights. Links change the capabilities of ships so much that they effectively destroy the ability of the pilot to know what they are fighting, and what chance they have of survival.
No. becuase u should always assume links. when u see a ship coming on dscan automatically assume it will web at 16 and scram at 14. unless garmur or orthrus or lachesis/arazu and some other eaf ive forgotten the name of
Pestilen Ratte wrote:Links change this completely. You think you face a tech 1 frigate. You have no idea that it has a much better tank than a tech 2 assault frigate, with more DPS, and can easily destroy 3 or 4 unlinked players by itself. stating that they get a much better tank than a t2 assault frigate is nonsense. period. also links do not affect ur dps check ur info. i would hazard that even with links i would die to 4 unlinked players unless i was kiting. in that case the extra speed and possibly lock range are most welcome.
Pestilen Ratte wrote:The only way to avoid off grid linked players is to never fight in a system where you don't know exactly where everyone is, or who and what they are. In other words, stay away from any system where there is more than one enemy or neutral, or where you can't see everyone in local on grid.
THAT is what links do for PVP. If you are serious about choosing your fights, those become the rules. Otherwise, your only option is to use off grid links yourself. At that point, PVP becomes inaccessible for new players, and small gangs are massively disadvantaged because they need to pay for an alt.
i played the game for almost 3 yeard before getting an alt. i feel ur pain, but i didnt lose every fight. indeed i still had a very positive kb iirc. its not impossible to win, and its not impossible to survive. u need experience.
Pestilen Ratte wrote:So, these are the three big problems with off grid links:
1. They destroy the ability to know what you face, and to choose your fights. 2. They completely unbalance PVP, making ships that would die 1 v 1 capable of taking on 3 or 4 enemy with ease. They are not subtle, but rather they are designed to make solo ships essentially invulnerable in small gang pvp. 3. They can't be countered, short of engaging in an arms race that has nothing to do with piloting and everything to do with spending isk, and time, in the pursuit of simple PVP.
1. no, see above 2. no that would be pilot skill. i'd dare say a noob with links will still die vs 3 or 4 unlinked vets. 3. you have defeatist attitude. not everyone has links. links wont win u every fight. they give u an edge.
Pestilen Ratte wrote:But let us not ignore the real problems with Eve, and with the culture at CCP. Last week I logged on and jumped into a navy faction frigate, and went to meet my corp 6 systems away. I was insta popped by TWO svipuls at the first gate, then podded. umm looking at the km. u got hit with artilllery on a svipul. pretty sure thats like 2k alpha, per shot. unless those svipuls were being remote sebo'd this loss shows that u are inexperienced.
when u jump through a gate. u need to assess what is around u. if u are in an unplated frig 90% of the time u can just warp off. the fact thaat you were caught means either remote sebo, or that u need to learn how to get off a gate like that. |
Daerrol
Death By Design Did he say Jump
253
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 17:48:45 -
[15] - Quote
If my story wasn't clear I don't fight with links. Sometimes I even go ISK positive though usually not. Drugs help a lot to make up for lack of links.
One time, I was flying Phantasm unlinked and undrugged in Null. I found 3 Mordus Angels on patrol. I engaged them. A zealot showed up and ruined the party. https://zkillboard.com/kill/44831846/ https://zkillboard.com/kill/44831858/ My death: https://zkillboard.com/kill/44831872/
This vegeance thought he was so cool, warping in on me with his backup Thrashers. I totally did not have links but I think Ihad a standard Drop Booster (2m stop being superpoor). I played this very poorly I admit. I should have murdered far more thrashers/escaped but I kinda forgot I was in FW and the thrashers were free to engage on a gate. Derp? Live and learn.
Cool Guy Tackle Vengeance: https://zkillboard.com/kill/49526598/ Thrasher Bro 1: https://zkillboard.com/kill/49526608/ Thrasher Bro 2: https://zkillboard.com/kill/49526603/ Poorly Flown Hurricane: https://zkillboard.com/kill/49526611/
My point is this: I am terrible at PVP. Like the worst. I can still make some kills though, what's your excuse?
|
Yang Aurilen
Conspiracy Theory. Project.Mayhem.
972
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 19:15:17 -
[16] - Quote
FIGHT FAIRLY AND DIE AND ROLL OVER AT 2V1! That's what he'll say.
Post with your NPC alt main and not your main main alt!
|
Cearain
Goose Swarm Coalition
1431
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 19:40:15 -
[17] - Quote
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.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Abannans Forum Alt
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
27
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 20:52:18 -
[18] - Quote
chances are, the guy who killed you with links would've probably killed you without them too |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
859
|
Posted - 2015.11.09 22:50:27 -
[19] - Quote
So how many threads do we need on this subject? |
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade
243
|
Posted - 2015.11.10 00:11:43 -
[20] - 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"
|
|
Lesovyk Mara
Funtime Factory
0
|
Posted - 2015.11.10 06:50:25 -
[21] - Quote
As an OGB alt, stop oppressing me.
Don't be so scared. I'm not even on grid with you, so I can't hurt you at all. |
Yang Aurilen
Conspiracy Theory. Project.Mayhem.
973
|
Posted - 2015.11.10 07:37:44 -
[22] - Quote
Lesovyk Mara wrote:As an OGB alt, stop oppressing me.
Don't be so scared. I'm not even on grid with you, so I can't hurt you at all.
No you are everything wrong in this world. You're even worse than those AFK cloakers in Jita. How can I 0.01 isk in peace if I know there is someone out there afk cloaking!
Post with your NPC alt main and not your main main alt!
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1575
|
Posted - 2015.11.10 17:02:00 -
[23] - Quote
Calm down everyone. Boosters are moving on grid in the fall of 2016.
t3 boosters will lose a bit more ooomph and the tankier command ships will get a leg up.
|
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade
243
|
Posted - 2015.11.10 17:07:29 -
[24] - 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"
|
Cearain
Goose Swarm Coalition
1432
|
Posted - 2015.11.10 17:12:45 -
[25] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:Calm down everyone. Boosters are moving on grid in the fall of 2016.
t3 boosters will lose a bit more ooomph and the tankier command ships will get a leg up.
Source please.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
298
|
Posted - 2015.11.10 18:13:53 -
[26] - Quote
Bastion Arzi wrote: not everyone has links. links wont win u every fight. they give u an edge.
Daerrol wrote: My point is this: I am terrible at PVP. Like the worst. I can still make some kills though, what's your excuse?
Abannans Forum Alt wrote:chances are, the guy who killed you with links would've probably killed you without them too
Posts like these are missing the point of why OGBs are so terrible.
The stats you gain from an AFK T3 alt are insanely over powered for their price, this is well documented. You get advantages you can't get anywhere else in the game for such a cheap price.
On top of those epic bonuses, the AFK T3 alt can also Cov Ops cloak, is very difficult to probe down, is interdiction nullified, and so is at very little risk itself.
Plus, the idea of creating a second account, training it for six months (just a vague estimation, I don't care if I'm technically wrong; I think you can get the point), and then dragging this secret alt around with you everywhere you go for PvP, is just really lame gameplay, I mean come on, that is such garbage. Does anyone really feel good or have fun dragging a Loki around with their main everywhere they go so that they can be risk averse with a cloaky nullified scout that boosts them from a safe spot every time they decide they want to fight? Sorry but that is just plain stupid.
I have an alt that just finished training for Loki, I used it a few times last month (I admit the actual PvP I did was pretty fun), but I've put it away and I'm going to sell the account based on principle. This type of gameplay is just too boring. It's boring, it's lame, it's any bad word you want to call it, but it's anything but interesting.
Of course links are not the only thing that matters, or they won't win you every fight, and it's not impossible to beat someone who used links, but that's all beside the point; links are insanely OP, they're relatively inexpensive, there's almost no risk involved in using them, and the gameplay itself that they provide is just garbage. It's an AFK second account that sits in space and gives your ship steroids. Wow, so awesome. /s
Links are cancer. They're the opposite of fun, interesting gameplay and they're completely imbalanced.
That's all I have to say about that. It's the last post I'll make in this thread, I didn't want to post in here again because it's redundant but I couldn't sleep thinking about it :D
Links are going to get fixed, you can be sure of that. There's no way around it, it's blatantly obvious how bad they are and a change is inevitable. |
Bastion Arzi
Angry Mustellid Decayed Orbit
297
|
Posted - 2015.11.10 19:14:32 -
[27] - Quote
same sort of thing someone said when i posted a thread asking ccp not to nerf the mach few years ago. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
859
|
Posted - 2015.11.10 19:37:33 -
[28] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:Calm down everyone. Boosters are moving on grid in the fall of 2016.
t3 boosters will lose a bit more ooomph and the tankier command ships will get a leg up.
Prepare for Incursion runner outrage in fall of 2016. |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
1088
|
Posted - 2015.11.10 20:54:10 -
[29] - Quote
IIRC, the commonly cited reason has been that bringing them on grid represented some significant technical hurdles re: the relatively expensive re-calculation of stats.
That issue should hopefully go away with brain in a box.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
40765
|
Posted - 2015.11.10 22:11:42 -
[30] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:Calm down everyone. Boosters are moving on grid in the fall of 2016.
t3 boosters will lose a bit more ooomph and the tankier command ships will get a leg up.
And grids are expanding to be several hundreds of kilometres wider than they currently are (maybe even a few thousand kilometres).
On grid won't really change much for many people and the whinging will continue.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
|
Berendas
The Learning Curve.
987
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 00:03:50 -
[31] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:Bastion Arzi wrote: not everyone has links. links wont win u every fight. they give u an edge.
Daerrol wrote: My point is this: I am terrible at PVP. Like the worst. I can still make some kills though, what's your excuse?
Abannans Forum Alt wrote:chances are, the guy who killed you with links would've probably killed you without them too Posts like these are missing the point of why OGBs are so terrible. The stats you gain from an AFK T3 alt are insanely over powered for their price, this is well documented. You get advantages you can't get anywhere else in the game for such a cheap price. On top of those epic bonuses, the AFK T3 alt can also Cov Ops cloak, is very difficult to probe down, is interdiction nullified, and so is at very little risk itself. Plus, the idea of creating a second account, training it for six months (just a vague estimation, I don't care if I'm technically wrong; I think you can get the point), and then dragging this secret alt around with you everywhere you go for PvP, is just really lame gameplay, I mean come on, that is such garbage. Does anyone really feel good or have fun dragging a Loki around with their main everywhere they go so that they can be risk averse with a cloaky nullified scout that boosts them from a safe spot every time they decide they want to fight? Sorry but that is just plain stupid. I have an alt that just finished training for Loki, I used it a few times last month (I admit the actual PvP I did was pretty fun), but I've put it away and I'm going to sell the account (or the character, I'm not exactly sure how that works) based on principle. This type of gameplay is just too boring. It's boring, it's lame, it's any bad word you want to call it, but it's anything but interesting. Of course links are not the only thing that matters, or they won't win you every fight, and it's not impossible to beat someone who used links, but that's all beside the point; links are insanely OP, they're relatively inexpensive, there's almost no risk involved in using them, and the gameplay itself that they provide is just garbage. It's an AFK second account that sits in space and gives your ship steroids. Wow, so awesome. /s Links are cancer. They're the opposite of fun or interesting gameplay and they're completely imbalanced. That's all I have to say about that. It's the last post I'll make in this thread, I didn't want to post in here again because it's redundant but I couldn't sleep thinking about it :D Links are going to get fixed, you can be sure of that. There's no way around it, it's obvious how bad they are and a change is inevitable.
This tbh |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
733
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 13:05:37 -
[32] - Quote
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.
|
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade
244
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 13:16:10 -
[33] - 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"
|
Abannans Forum Alt
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
28
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 13:40:06 -
[34] - Quote
still whining over an extra 15 dollars? lol |
Verlyn
Sisters of Xambu
46
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 14:17:12 -
[35] - Quote
Abannans Forum Alt wrote:still whining over an extra 15 dollars? lol
Yea sure, so force the layman to pay double to be able to compete.
You're also an idiot. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
859
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 15:25:17 -
[36] - Quote
Verlyn wrote:Abannans Forum Alt wrote:still whining over an extra 15 dollars? lol Yea sure, so force the layman to pay double to be able to compete. You're also an idiot.
Or find someone who is willing to follow you around in a OGB. It is an MMO after all. |
Reah Darknorth
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
9
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 19:24:15 -
[37] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:Verlyn wrote:Abannans Forum Alt wrote:still whining over an extra 15 dollars? lol Yea sure, so force the layman to pay double to be able to compete. You're also an idiot. Or find someone who is willing to follow you around in a OGB. It is an MMO after all. Congratulations! That's the dumbest thing I've read all day. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
733
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 20:26:32 -
[38] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:Verlyn wrote:Abannans Forum Alt wrote:still whining over an extra 15 dollars? lol Yea sure, so force the layman to pay double to be able to compete. You're also an idiot. Or find someone who is willing to follow you around in a OGB. It is an MMO after all.
Come on you're smarter than that. People use alts for these roles because they are tasks no human player would be willing to perform consistently, + the alt is at your command 24/7.
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
733
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 20:31:47 -
[39] - Quote
Abannans Forum Alt wrote:still whining over an extra 15 dollars? lol
What if it becomes 3 accounts? Or 4? This is a bad trend. I don't want my chances at a game to be so heavily dependent on how much extra cash, on top of the initial subscription, that I'm willing to fork over to the developer. |
Abannans Forum Alt
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
28
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 21:34:46 -
[40] - Quote
i pay for 5 v0v |
|
Cearain
Goose Swarm Coalition
1432
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 23:31:39 -
[41] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Abannans Forum Alt wrote:still whining over an extra 15 dollars? lol What if it becomes 3 accounts? Or 4? This is a bad trend. I don't want my chances at a game to be so heavily dependent on how much extra cash, on top of the initial subscription, that I'm willing to fork over to the developer.
That is the question the defenders of this bad mechanic never answer. Those who defend ogb seem to think dragging around one alt is fun. But why stop there wouldn't it be even more fun if you had to drag around 2, or 3, or 10? Or is it the case that paying an extra $15/month to drag one alt around is the "sweet spot"?
Scipio Artelius wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:Calm down everyone. Boosters are moving on grid in the fall of 2016.
t3 boosters will lose a bit more ooomph and the tankier command ships will get a leg up.
And grids are expanding to be several hundreds of kilometres wider than they currently are (maybe even a few thousand kilometres). On grid won't really change much for many people and the whinging will continue.
That may be true. It may also mean that the loss of players continues. Links would still be broken even if they were forced on the current grids. Honestly I have no idea what CCP was thinking the last time they "rebalanced" links a couple of years ago. Plenty of people told them they were still stupidly overpowered. I wonder if they have accepted that fact yet.
It appears they just suddenly realized the worm was overpowered (compared to most other pirate frigates) a few months ago even though people have been telling them its op for years.
I often just don't get how they do things and how long it takes them to recognize the obvious.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Verlyn
Sisters of Xambu
47
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 23:38:39 -
[42] - Quote
Abannans Forum Alt wrote:i pay for 5 v0v
World revolves around you doesn't it. |
Stalking Mantis
No.Mercy Triumvirate.
952
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 03:53:35 -
[43] - Quote
Links exist because so many people need as much advantage as possible fighting. CCP knows this and recognizes a cash cow. Many /l33t pvp pilots have their own OGB links alt. That is one more subscription for CCP.
So if you think CCP will kill a cash cow...think again.
Amarr Liason Officer Extraordinare
-->Check Out Amarrian Vengeance/Amarr FW History from 2011 to 2014
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=352629&find=unread
|
Abannans Forum Alt
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
28
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 04:22:45 -
[44] - Quote
Verlyn wrote:Abannans Forum Alt wrote:i pay for 5 v0v World revolves around you doesn't it.
yes it does this is why you keep quoting me |
Reah Darknorth
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 04:44:51 -
[45] - Quote
Quote:That is the question the defenders of this bad mechanic never answer. Those who defend ogb seem to think dragging around one alt is fun. But why stop there wouldn't it be even more fun if you had to drag around 2, or 3, or 10? Or is it the case that paying an extra $15/month to drag one alt around is the "sweet spot"?
this is a game of alts. the p2w is real.
but links are still the worst. the multiple account elites can keep their economic monopolies and their army of farming procurers. just let us the real players have real pvp that doesn't involve a p2w i-win button cloaked up off grid.
15 bucks aint a big deal
but its 15 bucks a month over the course of many months and eventually years, plus the plex you need to pay for the t3 or the hours of grinding to make isk to pay for it. ccp is rolling in the cash. you have to ask yourself if they even plan on doing anything about this or if they just plan on ignoring it and pretend it isnt there while of course graciously accepting the cash for it. if so we might have to start whining a little bit louder.
this is a problem that is worth discussing.
misguided posters like abannans forum alt can downplay the problem of links as much as they want, but it doesnt matter because were here to spread the truth. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
735
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 08:35:52 -
[46] - Quote
Stalking Mantis wrote:Links exist because so many people need as much advantage as possible fighting. CCP knows this and recognizes a cash cow. Many /l33t pvp pilots have their own OGB links alt. That is one more subscription for CCP.
So if you think CCP will kill a cash cow...think again.
I don't disagree with this. It's just a **** overall trend in gaming. Developers already realize people will pay $ for stupid cosmetic stuff, might aswell let them also pay for actual in-game advantages. Not really my idea of fun but some people seem to have no issue with it.
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
735
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 08:38:56 -
[47] - Quote
Reah Darknorth wrote:Quote:That is the question the defenders of this bad mechanic never answer. Those who defend ogb seem to think dragging around one alt is fun. But why stop there wouldn't it be even more fun if you had to drag around 2, or 3, or 10? Or is it the case that paying an extra $15/month to drag one alt around is the "sweet spot"? this is a game of alts. the p2w is real. but links are still the worst. the multiple account elites can keep their economic monopolies and their army of farming procurers. just let us the real players have real pvp that doesn't involve a p2w i-win button cloaked up off grid. 15 bucks aint a big deal but its 15 bucks a month over the course of many months and eventually years, plus the plex you need to pay for the t3 or the hours of grinding to make isk to pay for it. ccp is rolling in the cash. you have to ask yourself if they even plan on doing anything about this or if they just plan on ignoring it and pretend it isnt there while of course graciously accepting the cash for it. if so we might have to start whining a little bit louder. this is a problem that is worth discussing. misguided posters like abannans forum alt can downplay the problem of links as much as they want, but it doesnt matter because were here to spread the truth.
Well people like Abannan and Crosi who have invested time and money training or buying a booster don't want to see them go awat, any more than some cap pilots wanted to see skynet go away. It's understandable. I just wish they could look past their narrow self interest to see how badly overpowered OGB is compared to every other form of advantage and even every other conceivable alt setup in the game.
|
Switch Savage
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
215
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 10:34:35 -
[48] - 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.
Talking out your backside.
A two faction MSE Svipul with shield links is 33k ehp. 4k cold is only possible with a Zors AND Mid grade grade snakes on top of links. I highly doubt you have those stats and two small neuts and even if you did you would not have range control as well due to needing x2 MSE to even get close to "40k ehp". Sig radius is about right but you don't have a AB (even over prop) if your doing 4k cold and thus cant keep decent transversal on anything with a web.
As always you over exaggerate to suit your argument. Not saying a Svipul is not broken but quote some proper numbers next time.
The only fit i can assume your talking about is that ******** one that wastes three lows for Power Diags to get a increase of 4k ehp. If it is that fit then its not even close to "400 dps". |
Bastion Arzi
Angry Mustellid Decayed Orbit
299
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 10:46:20 -
[49] - Quote
switch is correct but i wont believe it impossible with some bling to achieve that speed. might be wrong |
Switch Savage
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
215
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 11:03:14 -
[50] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Reah Darknorth wrote:Quote:That is the question the defenders of this bad mechanic never answer. Those who defend ogb seem to think dragging around one alt is fun. But why stop there wouldn't it be even more fun if you had to drag around 2, or 3, or 10? Or is it the case that paying an extra $15/month to drag one alt around is the "sweet spot"? this is a game of alts. the p2w is real. but links are still the worst. the multiple account elites can keep their economic monopolies and their army of farming procurers. just let us the real players have real pvp that doesn't involve a p2w i-win button cloaked up off grid. 15 bucks aint a big deal but its 15 bucks a month over the course of many months and eventually years, plus the plex you need to pay for the t3 or the hours of grinding to make isk to pay for it. ccp is rolling in the cash. you have to ask yourself if they even plan on doing anything about this or if they just plan on ignoring it and pretend it isnt there while of course graciously accepting the cash for it. if so we might have to start whining a little bit louder. this is a problem that is worth discussing. misguided posters like abannans forum alt can downplay the problem of links as much as they want, but it doesnt matter because were here to spread the truth. Well people like Abannan and Crosi who have invested time and money training or buying a booster don't want to see them go awat, any more than some cap pilots wanted to see skynet go away. It's understandable. I just wish they could look past their narrow self interest to see how badly overpowered OGB is compared to every other form of advantage and even every other conceivable alt setup in the game.
It would irk me slightly if links went away as it would narrow my options for engaging large gangs solo. At the end of the day though eve is not a solo game and I would adapt my play style as required. |
|
Bastion Arzi
Angry Mustellid Decayed Orbit
299
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 12:08:14 -
[51] - Quote
yes, with snakes and zors ofc |
Cearain
Goose Swarm Coalition
1434
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 14:49:40 -
[52] - Quote
Stalking Mantis wrote:Links exist because so many people need as much advantage as possible fighting. CCP knows this and recognizes a cash cow. Many /l33t pvp pilots have their own OGB links alt. That is one more subscription for CCP.
So if you think CCP will kill a cash cow...think again.
It is hard to deny this possibility. It is, of course, myopic to think making players pay more money in order to engage in the very tedious work of dragging alts around will really help make money in the long run. But if they really werent that short sited why did ccp not truly rebalance this horrible mechanic when they did a passover a couple of years ago? Why don't they do something now until they can be on grid and figure out something better?
I know lots of people blame their pet peeve for the decline of players. But as a player all I can do is voice my own opinion. And there is plenty of evidence that many many players feel the same way. Whether this is the sole reason for someone to quit or just a reason they are not so enthused with EVE, even though they still play it, we get all sorts. That is why this issue keeps coming up. Its hard to say no one really cares about this issue and then complain that the issue keeps being raised. How many players just left the game when they realized how broken small scale pvp had become in this game? I can't answer that but given the feedback from players this is a substantial problem with the game.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
860
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 15:09:05 -
[53] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Estella Osoka wrote:Verlyn wrote:Abannans Forum Alt wrote:still whining over an extra 15 dollars? lol Yea sure, so force the layman to pay double to be able to compete. You're also an idiot. Or find someone who is willing to follow you around in a OGB. It is an MMO after all. Come on you're smarter than that. People use alts for these roles because they are tasks no human player would be willing to perform consistently, + the alt is at your command 24/7.
If some were willing to pay me enough, I'd do it. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
860
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 15:12:14 -
[54] - Quote
Reah Darknorth wrote:Estella Osoka wrote:Verlyn wrote:Abannans Forum Alt wrote:still whining over an extra 15 dollars? lol Yea sure, so force the layman to pay double to be able to compete. You're also an idiot. Or find someone who is willing to follow you around in a OGB. It is an MMO after all. Congratulations! That's the dumbest thing I've read all day. Edit: Sorry for being rude, but seriously...
Oh? Then you must be new to the forums, but your reaction is exactly why people do have an extra account with an OGB alt. |
Reah Darknorth
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
14
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 16:56:56 -
[55] - Quote
what is your point?
i guess we could pay someone to follow us in a tengu. i mean its possible. but what does that matter? we can still train an alt and do it ourselves, or buy one from the character bazaar, and links are still broken.
and my reaction is "exactly why people do have an extra account with an OGB alt." ?
what does that even mean? im pretty sure people use links because they are advantageous in pvp.
some of you need to try writing down actual coherent thoughts that pertain to the discussion. |
Bastion Arzi
Angry Mustellid Decayed Orbit
299
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 18:33:18 -
[56] - Quote
http://i.imgur.com/iI1pOh5.png
links coming on grid? |
Arla Sarain
698
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 18:47:12 -
[57] - Quote
Bastion Arzi wrote:http://i.imgur.com/iI1pOh5.png
links coming on grid? Instant primary ship.
Doubt those will ever be fit with links. Haven't seen how many highslots they have, but even being relatively easy to get into and obtain, they will likely be easier to probe probe down with the fewer amount of midslots they are likely to have.
Putting them with active links on grid is subject to painful headache of adjust fleet hierarchy mid fight if they are headshotted.
P.S. Preemptive "the gallente one is going to be OP". No highslot commitment for anything other than links, along with skirmish links. |
Bastion Arzi
Angry Mustellid Decayed Orbit
299
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 18:54:32 -
[58] - Quote
yea the gallente and minmitar ones look like they will be the most popular. wish i had more info |
Cearain
Goose Swarm Coalition
1437
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 20:02:48 -
[59] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Stalking Mantis wrote:Links exist because so many people need as much advantage as possible fighting. CCP knows this and recognizes a cash cow. Many /l33t pvp pilots have their own OGB links alt. That is one more subscription for CCP.
So if you think CCP will kill a cash cow...think again. I don't disagree with this. It's just a **** overall trend in gaming. Developers already realize people will pay $ for stupid cosmetic stuff, might aswell let them also pay for actual in-game advantages. Not really my idea of fun but some people seem to have no issue with it.
The other game I play online is chess. Often you need to pay a subscription to play online chess. I guess the same reasoning would go that if you don't pay an extra $15 a month you will have to play without one knight. I guess that would be a way to squeeze your customers, if people would actually put up with it. So far most chess websites have realized chess players won't put up with that. But then again chess players are notoriously cheap.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
738
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 20:06:18 -
[60] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Stalking Mantis wrote:Links exist because so many people need as much advantage as possible fighting. CCP knows this and recognizes a cash cow. Many /l33t pvp pilots have their own OGB links alt. That is one more subscription for CCP.
So if you think CCP will kill a cash cow...think again. I don't disagree with this. It's just a **** overall trend in gaming. Developers already realize people will pay $ for stupid cosmetic stuff, might aswell let them also pay for actual in-game advantages. Not really my idea of fun but some people seem to have no issue with it. The other game I play online is chess. Often you need to pay a subscription to play online chess. I guess the same reasoning would go that if you don't pay an extra $15 a month you will have to play without one knight. I guess that would be a way to squeeze your customers, if people would actually put up with it. So far most chess websites have realized chess players won't put up with that. But then again chess players are notoriously cheap.
You will just see more of it as developers realize they can get away with it. You already see examples here.
"MUH P2W superboosting pet is fair because everyone can buy one!"
|
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
860
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 22:56:53 -
[61] - Quote
Reah Darknorth wrote:what is your point?
i guess we could pay someone to follow us in a tengu. i mean its possible. but what does that matter? we can still train an alt and do it ourselves, or buy one from the character bazaar, and links are still broken.
and my reaction is "exactly why people do have an extra account with an OGB alt." ?
what does that even mean? im pretty sure people use links because they are advantageous in pvp.
some of you need to try writing down actual coherent thoughts that pertain to the discussion.
The point is, if people don't want to fly them, but the ship and mods are available in game; then people will find a work around.
Except for people admitting they have an OGB alt, no one has a way of telling if someone is multiboxing, or if it is another pilot. |
Arla Sarain
698
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 23:24:49 -
[62] - Quote
Bastion Arzi wrote:yea the gallente and minmitar ones look like they will be the most popular. wish i had more info All stats and fitting slots on SISI actually.
Looks like T1 level DPS if not lower. T1 Corax actually gets about 16% more deeps over the new one.
Good thing there is no linking/MJDing catalyst xD |
Reah Darknorth
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
15
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 23:47:44 -
[63] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:
The point is, if people don't want to fly them, but the ship and mods are available in game; then people will find a work around.
Except for people admitting they have an OGB alt, no one has a way of telling if someone is multiboxing, or if it is another pilot.
your posts are barely intelligible. and you still havent made a point. a point would be something like, "links are fine". you havent actually made one, youve just typed words and pressed "enter".
what you seem to be saying is that afk t3 boosters are some kind of "work around". but an afk alt that sits in a safe spot and provides 10 billion isk worth of statistical combat advantages to his fleet, is not a work around. i dare say it almost seems as if they were specifically designed to work this way, and even if they werent, they still have to be seen as a problem, because they do work this way, and theyre really good at it too.
youre right that no one has a way of telling if someone is multiboxing, or if it's another pilot. this is true, but what is your point? the afk t3 alt could be another player. the afk t3 alt could even be good friends with the guy he is boosting, doing it for free just because he likes his friend. who knows. but the afk t3 alt could also be just an afk t3 alt, purchased from the character bazaar specifically for the act of boosting someones main character in pvp, from a safe spot, afk.
and links are still broken. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
860
|
Posted - 2015.11.13 01:40:13 -
[64] - Quote
Reah Darknorth wrote:Estella Osoka wrote:
The point is, if people don't want to fly them, but the ship and mods are available in game; then people will find a work around.
Except for people admitting they have an OGB alt, no one has a way of telling if someone is multiboxing, or if it is another pilot.
your posts are barely intelligible. and you still havent made a point. a point would be something like, "links are fine". you havent actually made one, youve just typed words and pressed "enter". what you seem to be saying is that afk t3 boosters are some kind of "work around". but an afk alt that sits in a safe spot and provides 10 billion isk worth of statistical combat advantages to his fleet, is not a work around. i dare say it almost seems as if they were specifically designed to work this way, and even if they werent, they still have to be seen as a problem, because they do work this way, and theyre really good at it too. youre right that no one has a way of telling if someone is multiboxing, or if it's another pilot. this is true, but what is your point? the afk t3 alt could be another player. the afk t3 alt could even be good friends with the guy he is boosting, doing it for free just because he likes his friend. who knows. but the afk t3 alt could also be just an afk t3 alt, purchased from the character bazaar specifically for the act of boosting someones main character in pvp, from a safe spot, afk. and links are still broken.
Intelligible? At least the words I type have capitalization where needed and correct punctuation. Now you'll probably reply with some crap that you posted from your phone.
The bottomline is this is EVE. It's a cold, harsh, universe. Some people know how to deal with OGBs, and some don't. You are probably in the latter. Adapt, die, or GTFO. |
BABARR
PARABELUM-Project Vendetta Mercenary Group
24
|
Posted - 2015.11.13 01:51:01 -
[65] - Quote
"Why do off grid links exist?"
Cause CCP like when ppl subscribe a second account and offgrid booster perfectly push ppl to do that. |
Arla Sarain
698
|
Posted - 2015.11.13 01:54:05 -
[66] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:
The bottomline is this is EVE. It's a cold, harsh, universe.
Please hold whilst I redirect you to the Role Playing forum.
Estella Osoka wrote: Adapt, die, or GTFO. You need massive amount of people playing for a game to be an MMO. Not a massive amount of alts. |
Reah Darknorth
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
15
|
Posted - 2015.11.13 02:44:35 -
[67] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:
Intelligible? At least the words I type have capitalization where needed and correct punctuation. Now you'll probably reply with some crap that you posted from your phone.
The bottomline is this is EVE. It's a cold, harsh, universe. Some people know how to deal with OGBs, and some don't. You are probably in the latter. Adapt, die, or GTFO.
if you want to discuss punctuation, i suggest trying a grade 1 english class. here, we are generally documenting ideas in an informal and unofficial discussion.
youre right, eve is cold, harsh, and it is a universe. some people know how to deal with links and some dont
but your mistake is assuming that because i am completely against links, that it must be because i dont know how to deal with them. this is a fallacy. whether i know how to deal with links or not is irrelevant.
but i would like to point out that i am actually pretty good at pvp. the only real way to deal with links is to avoid them or bring your own. it is possible to beat a link user in a 1v1, but its no easy task, and it requires an adept understanding of the art of war (or the war of art). because thats the secret to eve pvp, and to all warfare in general. its the art of war, and the power of knowledge.
does that mean links are ok? no. theyre still broken, and you still have yet to make a point.
"adapt, die or GTFO..." well, yeah, the problem with that, is that it has nothing to do with what is right for the game or wrong for the game. its just a completely neutral phrase. it sounds cool, though, ill give you that. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
861
|
Posted - 2015.11.13 14:11:26 -
[68] - Quote
Reah Darknorth wrote:Estella Osoka wrote:
Intelligible? At least the words I type have capitalization where needed and correct punctuation. Now you'll probably reply with some crap that you posted from your phone.
The bottomline is this is EVE. It's a cold, harsh, universe. Some people know how to deal with OGBs, and some don't. You are probably in the latter. Adapt, die, or GTFO.
if you want to discuss punctuation, i suggest trying a grade 1 english class. here, we are generally documenting ideas in an informal and unofficial discussion. youre right, eve is cold, harsh, and it is a universe. some people know how to deal with links and some dont but your mistake is assuming that because i am completely against links, that it must be because i dont know how to deal with them. this is a fallacy. whether i know how to deal with links or not is irrelevant. but i would like to point out that i am actually pretty good at pvp. the only real way to deal with links is to avoid them or bring your own. it is possible to beat a link user in a 1v1, but its no easy task, and it requires an adept understanding of the art of war (or the war of art). because thats the secret to eve pvp, and to all warfare in general. its the art of war, and the power of knowledge. does that mean links are ok? no. theyre still broken, and you still have yet to make a point. "adapt, die or GTFO..." well, yeah, the problem with that, is that it has nothing to do with what is right for the game or wrong for the game. its just a completely neutral phrase. it sounds cool, though, ill give you that.
Sure you are good at pvp. Especially when it's popping people on the undock in Rens. https://zkillboard.com/character/95830809/
|
Reah Darknorth
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
15
|
Posted - 2015.11.13 15:32:06 -
[69] - Quote
again you resort to things which have literally nothing to do with the discussion |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
861
|
Posted - 2015.11.13 19:15:16 -
[70] - Quote
Reah Darknorth wrote:again you resort to things which have literally nothing to do with the discussion. you are on a roll!
you linked the killboard of a two month old alt, you totally proved me wrong lol
You're an alt??? Hmm....
Reah Darknorth wrote:but links are still the worst. the multiple account elites can keep their economic monopolies and their army of farming procurers. just let us the real players have real pvp that doesn't involve a p2w i-win button cloaked up off grid.
And here I thought you were a real player trying to have real PVP. Ironic.
|
|
Reah Darknorth
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
15
|
Posted - 2015.11.13 20:12:29 -
[71] - Quote
yes this is an alt used for "popping things on rens undock", as well as other mundane activity such as hauling. to repeat what i said earlier, eve is a game of alts.
but there are major differences between that type of every day use of alternate characters, and using an alt as an afk off grid fleet booster. the main difference being that links are a totally broken game mechanic, a fact which you have yet to refute in any way.
i am still waiting for you to make some kind of point, but i suspect you will continue with your irrelevant fallacies and out of context straw man arguments. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
738
|
Posted - 2015.11.14 08:18:16 -
[72] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:Reah Darknorth wrote:Estella Osoka wrote:
The point is, if people don't want to fly them, but the ship and mods are available in game; then people will find a work around.
Except for people admitting they have an OGB alt, no one has a way of telling if someone is multiboxing, or if it is another pilot.
your posts are barely intelligible. and you still havent made a point. a point would be something like, "links are fine". you havent actually made one, youve just typed words and pressed "enter". what you seem to be saying is that afk t3 boosters are some kind of "work around". but an afk alt that sits in a safe spot and provides 10 billion isk worth of statistical combat advantages to his fleet, is not a work around. i dare say it almost seems as if they were specifically designed to work this way, and even if they werent, they still have to be seen as a problem, because they do work this way, and theyre really good at it too. youre right that no one has a way of telling if someone is multiboxing, or if it's another pilot. this is true, but what is your point? the afk t3 alt could be another player. the afk t3 alt could even be good friends with the guy he is boosting, doing it for free just because he likes his friend. who knows. but the afk t3 alt could also be just an afk t3 alt, purchased from the character bazaar specifically for the act of boosting someones main character in pvp, from a safe spot, afk. and links are still broken. Intelligible? At least the words I type have capitalization where needed and correct punctuation. Now you'll probably reply with some crap that you posted from your phone. The bottomline is this is EVE. It's a cold, harsh, universe. Some people know how to deal with OGBs, and some don't. You are probably in the latter. Adapt, die, or GTFO.
Lmao. So cold and harsh until I buy a second account with cloaky booster/scout. Then it's just cold and harsh for other people. There is no way to adapt to OGB other than to buy one yourself or dock up. There's no trade-off or drawback to OGB at all. This "cold, harsh universe ****" from people who have a cloaky alt pre-jumping every gate is pure hilarity. |
Burtakus
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
38
|
Posted - 2015.11.16 03:14:02 -
[73] - Quote
I will advocate for the removal of off grid links when:
a) gate camps are removed b) I can fly solo ( as I am mainly a solo pilot) and not have to worry about getting jumped by more than 2 other pilots flying the same ship class or lower
If the argument is that links give you an edge then why should I not use my investment in that edge to counter the edge others get from their gate camps and the ever present blob that seems to be so popular today.
|
Silverbackyererse
The Church of Awesome
167
|
Posted - 2015.11.16 08:52:17 -
[74] - Quote
I would like to advocate for the removal of off grid link whiners.It's old, it's boring, it's all been said before.
Maybe you could all toddle off to Minecraft, get a server together and make a new axe to grind.
|
Yang Aurilen
Conspiracy Theory. Project.Mayhem.
982
|
Posted - 2015.11.16 11:48:25 -
[75] - Quote
Burtakus wrote:I will advocate for the removal of off grid links when:
a) gate camps are removed b) I can fly solo ( as I am mainly a solo pilot) and not have to worry about getting jumped by more than 2 other pilots flying the same ship class or lower
If the argument is that links give you an edge then why should I not use my investment in that edge to counter the edge others get from their gate camps and the ever present blob that seems to be so popular today.
So you want to nerf Friend Ship?
Post with your NPC alt main and not your main main alt!
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1585
|
Posted - 2015.11.16 16:08:20 -
[76] - Quote
So many times ive warped into 10-20 dudes. They are happy to sit on the warp in and get a boring easy kill, but when i evade or coast out of scram suddenly links are super lame. If they have their own sometimes they complain about snakes instead.
Everyone wants to blame something else for their own failings. The same people so angry about links will be just as angry about something else if links are removed. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
862
|
Posted - 2015.11.16 21:37:51 -
[77] - Quote
Yang Aurilen wrote:Burtakus wrote:I will advocate for the removal of off grid links when:
a) gate camps are removed b) I can fly solo ( as I am mainly a solo pilot) and not have to worry about getting jumped by more than 2 other pilots flying the same ship class or lower
If the argument is that links give you an edge then why should I not use my investment in that edge to counter the edge others get from their gate camps and the ever present blob that seems to be so popular today.
So you want to nerf Friend Ship?
If I am fighting in a timezone where I don't have support, and my options are to blueball a group sitting in a novice/small plex, or bring in a OGB to even things up; I'll choose the OGB everytime. |
Cearain
Goose Swarm Coalition
1439
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 00:57:36 -
[78] - Quote
Silverbackyererse wrote:I would like to advocate for the removal of off grid link whiners.It's old, it's boring, it's all been said before.
It's all been said before? Even this argument:
Silverbackyererse wrote: Maybe you could all toddle off to Minecraft, get a server together and make a new axe to grind.
Without fail, the worst eve posters always come out to defend this horrible mechanic.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
742
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 01:31:47 -
[79] - Quote
Silverbackyererse wrote:I would like to advocate for the removal of off grid link whiners.It's old, it's boring, it's all been said before. Maybe you could all toddle off to Minecraft, get a server together and make a new axe to grind.
When they bring links on-grid and Diageo has to get a real job, do you plan to unsub?
If so, can I have your stuff?
|
Silverbackyererse
The Church of Awesome
171
|
Posted - 2015.11.18 06:37:34 -
[80] - Quote
@ Cearain
How on earth can you interpret my post as defending anything? I was simply expressing that I'm over reading the same old gripes from the same old people in the same old threads. However I will concede that it was definitely a shiptoast of questionable quality. I would however like to point out that it takes a shiptoaster to know a shiptoaster.
@ Demerius
Dago has >100m SP - he has plenty of uses - links are just one of his many talents. So, no plans to unsub him and no you can't have my stuffz. You couldn't handle my stuffz. How you going anyways man? Last time I saw you mooching around Okkamon you were travelling with a T3 links ship. What is it they say about glass houses and stones?
|
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
745
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 20:57:30 -
[81] - Quote
Silverbackyererse wrote:@ Cearain How on earth can you interpret my post as defending anything? I was simply expressing that I'm over reading the same old gripes from the same old people in the same old threads. However I will concede that it was definitely a shiptoast of questionable quality. I would however like to point out that it takes a shiptoaster to know a shiptoaster. @ Demerius Dago has >100m SP - he has plenty of uses - links are just one of his many talents. So, no plans to unsub him and no you can't have my stuffz. You couldn't handle my stuffz. How you going anyways man? Last time I saw you mooching around Okkamon you were travelling with a T3 links ship. What is it they say about glass houses and stones?
I already said links are so batshit insane overpowered that it's stupid not to use them. That realization doesn't contradict my position that well, links are batshit insane overpowered and possess a level of risk that's not commiserate with the benefit they provide.
So I will fly with links whenever possible until OGB gets glassed from orbit with the nuclear nerf missile they so richly deserve.
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.
|
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome
1502
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 22:09:26 -
[82] - Quote
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??
https://soundcloud.com/ibanezlaney
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
867
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 02:58:02 -
[83] - Quote
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??
Prolly Command Destroyers. |
Madrax573
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
21
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 05:05:22 -
[84] - Quote
CD's sound 'interesting'
but yeah like most things people aren't willing to adapt to they will be whined about!!
The universe is my playground
|
Morgan Agrivar
Happy Endings Massage Parlor
171
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 10:15:25 -
[85] - Quote
Never really relied on OGBs at all. Main reason why I do not pvp in lowsec. If someone comes along and cleans my clock, I want to know it was because he was just better than me, not because he had a T3C boosting him to godhood.
If they decide to remove OGBs, then I might wander back into lowsec again.
Just something about me...
|
Gorthanator
SQUIDS.
21
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 10:41:40 -
[86] - Quote
Can't imagine that they had a discussion where they said "we are going to make it mandatory to have to buy and fund a second account in order to be competitive at PVP" I personally think they wanted something for players with old characters that weren't interested in industry or caps to dump skillpoints in and to be ongrid links. They don't work like that in my experience and I Don't like em personally but that argument has been done to death.
it's a mechanic that needs work lets hope they are. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1590
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 12:43:23 -
[87] - Quote
Theres a huge number of things in eve for which you need a second account to be competitive.
Complaining about that at this point is kind of silly. Specially when you are so selective with the critique. |
Gorthanator
SQUIDS.
21
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 13:02:08 -
[88] - Quote
You have an opinion and I have an opinion but the question in the OP is, why do they exist? which invites us to speculate. I just added my voice to other people who have criticised the mechanic. is it game breaking no, is it game enhancing no. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
745
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 14:45:20 -
[89] - Quote
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.)
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
875
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 16:39:02 -
[90] - Quote
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. |
|
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade
246
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 18:16:58 -
[91] - 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"
|
Lucy Callagan
SnaiLs aNd FroGs Drama Sutra
28
|
Posted - 2015.11.22 00:59:31 -
[92] - Quote
Do you even realise that you guys only discuss of OGBs in low sec ? Do you even realise that in null they are just fine and the only way for small gangs to compete with home defense blob?
So ok maybe OBG are worse than aids in low sec, i don't know, i don't play there and i hate that place.
But if bringing them on grid is the way to fix them in lowsec, it totaly fucks up null secs small gangs. I'll just copy paste here what i already said somewhere else. I you don't speak french just use google traduction or anything, it's 2AM and i'm to lazy to traduce sry
"Lucy Callagan" wrote:"Nyvis" wrote:"Lucy Callagan" wrote:"Nyvis" wrote: Mais tu vois des masses de frig t1 link+¬es qui vont combattre des newbies en plex fw. Le seul r+¬sultat, c'est que plus personne engage de peur que ton adversaire soit sous link. +ºa c'est probl+¿me localis+¬ au low sec uniquement, mettre les links on grid en low aurait peut-+¬tre un impact b+¬n+¬fique sur le probl+¿me mais les cons+¬quences seraient tr+¿s differentes en nullsec. J'avais pas pens+¬ +á cette approche, mais ouais, c'est pas faux, l'impact est tr+¿s diff+¬rent entre les deux zones (sans parler du highsec o+¦ tu peux wardec et avoir un alt link hors corp). Le solo est tr+¿s diff+¬rent aussi. J'ai moins d'exp+¬rience des engagements de petite taille en null, donc j'ai moins id+¬e de l'impact. Mais dans l'ensemble, je pense pas que +ºa change grand chose, +á part ouvrir plus de possibilit+¬s aux groupes +á bas skill points, vu que dans la majorit+¬ des cas, un gang undock pas sans boosts. Apr+¿s, le fait qu'on puisse te snipe ton booster s'il est on grid peut +¬tre un probl+¿me. Disons que +ºa desavantage clairement les groupes smg. Par exemple: une fleet de machin blob random vs 5/10 mec en kite @50-60 km(engagement type en ns). Les links du blob sit bien tranquilement sur la gate prot+¬g+¬ par tous les potos et eventuellement sous reps pendant que les links su smg sont mwd on :mwd: @ 250-300 km ou a cot+¬ de ses poto. Que se passe-t-il ? Le links du blob ne courre aucun risque et n'est donc pas +¬liminable, alors que pour les 5/10 mecs, soit leurs links sont combat prob+¬ (et comme c'est sur une gate/station +ºa se fait literralement en <10s) soit deux ou trois jihad-inty suffisent a avoir un tackle suffisant pour le tomber. Et m+¬me si cela n'y parviennent pas, les links du smg courrent un risque alors que ceux du blob non. Conclusion, le smg et encore plus le solo est d+¬savantag+¬. Quote:+á part ouvrir plus de possibilit+¬s aux groupes +á bas skill points, Un groupe low sp vs un blob revient a la situation suivante mais sans links donc c'est encore pire. Dans un deuxieme cas de figure, un groupe low sp(i.e je sais pas moi ? Caracals, svipuls, vexor, inty, eventuellement typhoon ?) vs des joueur qui jouent habituellement avec des links(i.e Orthrus, Mach, Vigilant, rapier?)... Le resultat reste le m+¬me, avec ou sans links d'un cot+¬ comme de l'autre.
[17:34:53] LucyCallagan > Respectez mon Eliterie je vous prie !
|
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome
1503
|
Posted - 2015.11.24 04:15:32 -
[93] - Quote
Lucy Callagan wrote:Do you even realise that you guys only discuss of OGBs in low sec ? Do you even realise that in null they are just fine and the only way for small gangs to compete with home defense blob?
So ok maybe OBG are worse than aids in low sec, i don't know, i don't play there and i hate that place.
But if bringing them on grid is the way to fix them in lowsec, it totaly fucks up null secs small gangs. I'll just copy paste here what i already said somewhere else. I you don't speak french just use google traduction or anything, it's 2AM and i'm to lazy to traduce sry
They are fine in low sec too and used for the exact same reason you state they are used for in Null sec.
Null sec isn't 'special' when it come to link use.
https://soundcloud.com/ibanezlaney
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1593
|
Posted - 2015.11.24 08:12:12 -
[94] - Quote
Links are broken and make my solo pvp broken, which is after all the main focus of eve.
Links are god mode and they are simply impossible to catch. Some may point to the fact that over 2 days more than half a dozen link ships have been destroyed in our current system push (pushes which never happen because there is no mechanical incentive to force people to do so all the time, rather leaving it to player choice driven by their own narrative, lame). But those people are lying and the role of taking hostile links out of the equation in a larger battle that is spread across up to 4 plexes with over 100 players is a joke when you compare it to my single kestrel trying to find half fit russian farming alts in back end systems WHO ARE ALSO BROKEN BECAUSE THEY KEEP WARPING AWAY!!!!!!!
Links are simply broken because they interfere with my choice to fly alone when other people use friends and alts. |
Switch Savage
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
218
|
Posted - 2015.11.24 12:36:12 -
[95] - Quote
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.)
Honestly though i cannot think of a single fight bar one in the last six months that i directly lost because my opponent was linked.
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
754
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 02:50:17 -
[96] - Quote
Switch Savage 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.) Honestly though i cannot think of a single fight bar one in the last six months that i directly lost because my opponent was linked.
Well, good for you. I see fights or the lack thereof on a daily basis decided by links.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1594
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 03:15:17 -
[97] - Quote
Everyone knows i use links. I have no lack of fights.
Perhaps the problem with you is something else? |
Leonardo Adami
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
60
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 04:26:24 -
[98] - Quote
In my humble opinion removing off grid links without completely reworking links will essentially kill small gangs. Please know I'm not pro link alts at all, I'm in the camp all links off gird, on grid, whatever should be completely removed from the game. If CCP decides to remove off grid boost they need to make on grid boost an active activity so that the person running links has to target specific players and only those players get the link their targeted with similar to applying dps or reps. When one person reps someone the whole fleet doesn't get repped or if some applies targeted dps the whole fleet doesn't take damage. Boost should require thought and action on the part of the person flying the ship and should affect only targeted people. |
Aves Asio
3
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 12:34:57 -
[99] - Quote
Switch Savage wrote:Honestly though i cannot think of a single fight bar one in the last six months that i directly lost because my opponent was linked.
Thats because you have the advantage of knowing who uses links in your area. |
Switch Savage
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
219
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 13:56:07 -
[100] - Quote
Well for a start you should should gain Intel about players in your area so everyone should have that advantage. I also fight linked PvPers with decent counters if i have them available. I also use links myself when roaming in larger more expensive ships just so we are clear.
There are however very few situations where links purely decide the outcome of the fight and in those that they do, i admit it can be frustrating. A lot of people seem to simply find it easier to roll over, die and complain rather than adapt to an opponent though.
For example I was flying an arty Svipul and my prey was flying a autocannon Svipul. Once i had confirmed his max cold m/s i judged he had snakes but no links. His speed spiked and i wrongly put that down to him overheating to catch me so i heated my web/prop and waited for him to close. His scram landed at the same range my overheated web did and he ended up catching me.
Now my first thought after the fight was not "damn links so OP". I was simply annoyed at myself for incorrectly assuming his speed increase was a result of him overloading, when it was actually him turning links on. This was MY mistake I learnt from it and moved on and did not instantly complain for links to be removed. It makes for a more dynamic PvP environment in my opinion and anyone saying they are a barrier for entry into PvP is not a good PvPer. |
|
Thanatos Marathon
Black Fox Marauders
577
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 14:38:41 -
[101] - Quote
If you dislike fighting linked ships I highly recommend that you hunt them.
I've killed 8 of them in the last 2 days of action in Pavanakka.
Proof
Also, if you would like assistance in learning how to kill link ships Gallente Militia is recruiting and willing to teach.
- Than
Black Fox Marauders is Recruiting
|
Switch Savage
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
219
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 14:50:53 -
[102] - Quote
Thanatos Marathon wrote:If you dislike fighting linked ships I highly recommend that you hunt them. I've killed 8 of them in the last 2 days of action in Pavanakka. ProofAlso, if you would like assistance in learning how to kill link ships Gallente Militia is recruiting and willing to teach. - Than
Brings a tear to my eye, nice work. |
Raya Efiel
Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate
1
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 18:18:26 -
[103] - Quote
Thanatos Marathon wrote:If you dislike fighting linked ships I highly recommend that you hunt them. I've killed 8 of them in the last 2 days of action in Pavanakka. ProofAlso, if you would like assistance in learning how to kill link ships Gallente Militia is recruiting and willing to teach. - Than
Killing our links! Not cool. How are we supposed to fight the Gals without links? |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1596
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 18:29:29 -
[104] - Quote
Player solution to making the gameplay of ogb a little more consuming.
Who would have thought? |
Arla Sarain
708
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 20:06:20 -
[105] - Quote
Thanatos Marathon wrote:If you dislike fighting linked ships I highly recommend that you hunt them. I've killed 8 of them in the last 2 days of action in Pavanakka. ProofAlso, if you would like assistance in learning how to kill link ships Gallente Militia is recruiting and willing to teach. - Than This is just rolling the argument back and forth like a poorly wrapped joint.
You caught some link ships amongst heavy commotion.
The entire discussion just goes back and forth between the same points A) Links are nigh uncounterable in small gang/1v1 fights. B) Links are crucial for small gangs to fight blobs C) Links are counterable with a highly specialised investment assuming the links owner is occupied and doesn't check D-SCAN D) Fighting links boils down to who brings a prober or another linking ship. E) "This is an MMO so bring some pet frands to play the bullshit part of the game, cos frands" D) Countering link ships in LS involves circumventing the station/gate mechanics.
Each successive post just repeats one or two of these.
Tiring TBH. |
Thanatos Marathon
Black Fox Marauders
580
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 20:11:34 -
[106] - Quote
I said nothing about supporting current design of links. I'm just a proponent of hunting them and blowing them up for isk.
Black Fox Marauders is Recruiting
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
881
|
Posted - 2015.11.25 20:12:24 -
[107] - Quote
Thanatos Marathon wrote:If you dislike fighting linked ships I highly recommend that you hunt them. I've killed 8 of them in the last 2 days of action in Pavanakka. ProofAlso, if you would like assistance in learning how to kill link ships Gallente Militia is recruiting and willing to teach. - Than
I like this. Never underestimate how people will forgo tank because they want the best bang for their buck. |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1332
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 11:35:35 -
[108] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:You will just see more of it as developers realize they can get away with it. You already see examples here.
"MUH P2W superboosting pet is fair because everyone can buy one!"
In those years I've used my links, I've been probed maybe half a dozen times and had to move my OGB. Compared to the number of times I've been called names for using them, that's not a lot.
Else I got two toons with CS skills, so I'm nerfproof anyways. It's just not that feasible cause cap consumption on warfare links is stupid and makes it extremely hard to justify putting them on field as opposed to leaving them on a safespot. They make links passive, or with token ativation cost - I'll reconsider. Also, a CS boosting itself without the need to have a random guy somewhere in system is needed. |
C11H17NO3
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 16:23:58 -
[109] - Quote
I do not care that links and or "off grid links" exist.
I just want to have the linking char and ship show up on Kill mails so we know who the truly solo pilots are and which ones are not.
I also want a status attribute on KM's to denote whether the pilots were in a fleet or not at the time, to indicate scout and probe/scanning use. |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
40934
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 00:36:28 -
[110] - Quote
C11H17NO3 wrote:I do not care that links and or "off grid links" exist.
I just want to have the linking char and ship show up on Kill mails so we know who the truly solo pilots are and which ones are not.
I also want a status attribute on KM's to denote whether the pilots were in a fleet or not at the time, to indicate scout and probe/scanning use. Well from CCP Fozzie on the stream today, links are being bought on grid soon (not before Christmas, so we can assume early in the new year) and possibly with an area of effect also.
Those that use links will adapt and the whinging will continue as always.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
|
D0nci
Ten Below Zero
0
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 00:39:53 -
[111] - Quote
The whiners won, they'll be removing OGB in the next few months. RIP small gang, all hail the blobs. Fozzie talks about it in this stream:
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp/v/27816547
from 1:08:25 (rest is not really important) |
ALUCARD 1208
Spiritus Draconis Spaceship Bebop
422
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 00:48:42 -
[112] - Quote
falcon alts errywere \o/
BEBOPS ODE TO PERUNGA
|
D0nci
Ten Below Zero
0
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 00:56:53 -
[113] - Quote
ALUCARD 1208 wrote:falcon alts errywere \o/ And thus the whining will continue until they remove ECM from game. Then the next best anti-blob mechanic... It really just keeps on going until we are only left with n00bships. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1598
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 01:27:28 -
[114] - Quote
People are already gearing up for ewar whining with the new faction electronic frigs. Personally, im gearing up to make sure my booster alt is very well trained for them. |
Dani Maulerant
Order of the Valkyrie LOADED-DICE
37
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 01:41:06 -
[115] - Quote
Least with ewar alts those KMs will no longer list information as appearing faux "solo" lolololol Much easier to trade, track, and prove information of who flies with an extra on hand.
I think this year I will be asking the Mall Santa for bulk industrial drum containers for all the tears to come. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1598
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 01:42:32 -
[116] - Quote
You realise that people cry more about being perma jammed than they do when they lose to someone who is boosted? |
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome
1505
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 05:42:10 -
[117] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:You realise that people cry more about being perma jammed than they do when they lose to someone who is boosted?
I think unsubbing link toons to hit CCP in the pocket and to lower the online player count will also be an option for people who use links.
https://soundcloud.com/ibanezlaney
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
756
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 06:34:49 -
[118] - Quote
I'm gonna need a bigger mop for all these tears.
#getgood |
Yun Kuai
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
286
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 06:40:13 -
[119] - Quote
IbanezLaney wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:You realise that people cry more about being perma jammed than they do when they lose to someone who is boosted? I think unsubbing link toons to hit CCP in the pocket and to lower the online player count will also be an option for people who use links.
Interestingly enough, I just resubbed my alt account. Granted she's got CS 5 and max links, but she also has logi 5, Cal/Gal BS 5, Recon 5, and can sit in a Cal/Gal Carrier. I won't be so upset with links moving on grid.
Now, just need to talk to the Chinese government and explain to them why they need to open up their interwebs because dual boxing here is just asking for insta-DC's all day, everyday
--------------------------------------------------------::::::::::::--:::-----:::---::::::::::::--------------:::----------:::----:::---:::----------------------:::::::-------:::---:::----::::::-------------------:::-----------:::--:::----:::---------------------::::::::::::----:::::::----:::::::::::::-------
|
Kalo Askold
Sanguis Inceptum
15
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 07:32:39 -
[120] - Quote
Meh links are the cancer of lowsec and now highsec station games. Need at least a 2bil pod to compete or pay for another account. Then ccp wonders why their active numbers are so small with less and less new people no matter how good the tutorial phase is. Between links and op ships no reason for a new bro to try eve pvp unless dragged in by a friend. Thier play time will just be death after death because someone has another account running a 500mil t3c for their 3 mil kestrel vs their own low sp kestrel. As for older people using links, lol risk adverse little s----. Enjoy dying to my griffin fleets! |
|
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome
1505
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 09:29:17 -
[121] - Quote
Yun Kuai wrote:IbanezLaney wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:You realise that people cry more about being perma jammed than they do when they lose to someone who is boosted? I think unsubbing link toons to hit CCP in the pocket and to lower the online player count will also be an option for people who use links. Interestingly enough, I just resubbed my alt account. Granted she's got CS 5 and max links, but she also has logi 5, Cal/Gal BS 5, Recon 5, and can sit in a Cal/Gal Carrier. I won't be so upset with links moving on grid. Now, just need to talk to the Chinese government and explain to them why they need to open up their interwebs because dual boxing here is just asking for insta-DC's all day, everyday
I was going to just dual box ECM like most other people are planning - but I figured I'd rather save the $$ and go back to the simple life of one account.
Chinese Internet has to be better than Aussie Internet.
We basically have tin cans connected by string gaffa taped onto the sides of our computers.
https://soundcloud.com/ibanezlaney
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1599
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 12:49:36 -
[122] - Quote
Kalo Askold wrote:Meh links are the cancer of lowsec and now highsec station games. Need at least a 2bil pod to compete or pay for another account. Then ccp wonders why their active numbers are so small with less and less new people no matter how good the tutorial phase is. Between links and op ships no reason for a new bro to try eve pvp unless dragged in by a friend. Thier play time will just be death after death because someone has another account running a 500mil t3c for their 3 mil kestrel vs their own low sp kestrel. As for older people using links, lol risk adverse little s----. Enjoy dying to my griffin fleets!
I would expect that links play no negative role in the sub numbers.
To try and breath life into the game CCP should fix the initial overview and window layout to make it functional so new players dont have to learn how to customise eve before they even know how to play.
Every new player should have all fitting skills at 4, tank skills to 3 and all their chosen racial ship skills (up to BS) to 3 along with their racial weapon and weapon support skills. The game is far too old to expect people to start from scratch, even with the new player SP tweak recently.
Each school should have paid/free sub FCs who spam chat with open fleets to go and brawl each other in non-fw low sec to clash with each other with the possibility of roaming further, or also getting dunked by locals. FCs could be elected or just trialed on activity levels depending on the reward they receive. This gives new players the oppertunity to get away from shooting red crosses on day one. Perhaps there should be gateless pockets in these systems where boosts dont function so discourage l33t pvpers from ruining their entry level fun.
Removing links will result in an initial plummet of sub numbers that will never be replaced by new newbs who never knew links existed anyway and who are still gonna get dunked by more experienced players. Nor will they be replaced by the whiners who more than likely quit due to burn out but their own lack of introspection leads them point fingers and blame everything else.
Now, my link alt is also perfect moros, perfect triage, all t2 ship skills to 5 bar marauder, jump portal 5 and cyno 5, so i will likely see if there remains any enjoyable ways to use it before i unsub it. But in reality all i see for link changes is;
-People blobbing up slightly more. -Large alpha fleets will continue their resurgence with links being removed from grid within 10 seconds of the fight starting. -Lerger entities who can field more than half a dozen CS will have the enjoyable task of swapping out booster alts on the fly as theirs die. Or at least have many CS on field to minimise the chance of losing their boosts. -Fights returning to gates where CS can jump and reapproach. -Medium+ t1 cruiser fights being a brutal and fast dps race where logi, particularly armour have no chance to lock and cycle before anything dies.
We will have to see what CCP does with smaller command hulls, boost ranges and grid sizes before a clearer picture of the impacts will become clear.
Lets just face facts though, removing many hundreds of characters from their primary role to appease a small number of l33t solo kestrel pvpers and newbs that quit the game before they even set foot in lowsec is not going to result in greater concurrent subscriptions lol. |
Ragged Starkiller
Hoplite Brigade
7
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 13:54:59 -
[123] - Quote
Indeed off grid links are a horrible idea for overall EVE players.
Who gets advantage of this ?. Obviously people with more than 1 account or using, one account with multiple active characters.
off grid links are a HORRIBLE mechanic, sadly as someone said before, if CCP changes this mechanic they will get some people angry and probably lose those players.
I wonder if CCP has the guts to make a survey about off grid links and call the decision based on the community feelings about this ridiculous mechanic.
By the other side, ON GRID LINKS are a great mechanic for fleets that will people actually fly those ships and fit them properly.
Maybe just add restrictions to off grid and bonuses to on grid links may help partially fix the issue!
PLEASE CCP, what's your next move. |
Johnny Riko
Jump Drive Appreciation Society Test Alliance Please Ignore
99
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 14:13:28 -
[124] - Quote
I think you're a bit delusional.
Yes EVE isn't massively popular, but most MMOs have suffered over the last few years, as economic reasons mean people are less inclined to want to spend money on a subscription.
Off-grid links needed to be removed because they are a completely unfair game mechanic. High reward, low risk. They make no sense in any context. On-grid links not only is much more reasonable, but it adds another layer of strategy to fights, as well as gives boosting ships a completely different role.
Off-grid links should be removed regardless of whether they have a positive or negative impact on subscription numbers. If CCP really want to whore themselves out that much, then they should just make every aspect of the game Pay2Win, because as much as bittervets hate to admit it, EVE is actually far more pay2win than most MMOs, and "player skill" is vastly overstated. Lets see an experienced player of 5 years fly a low SP character against someone who has been playing 6 months, but has access to a 50m+ SP character, with enough isk to completely bling out his ships and pod, and also have an off-grid booster, all brought to him courtesy of his credit card. I don't care how much "player skill" the vet has, he will loss more often than not. I'm glad CCP has acknowledged things need to change and will be removing off-grid links.
I wanna join up. I think I got what it takes to be a Citizen.
|
Ragged Starkiller
Hoplite Brigade
7
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 14:19:30 -
[125] - Quote
Kalo Askold wrote:Meh links are the cancer of lowsec and now highsec station games. Need at least a 2bil pod to compete or pay for another account. Then ccp wonders why their active numbers are so small with less and less new people no matter how good the tutorial phase is. Between links and op ships no reason for a new bro to try eve pvp unless dragged in by a friend. Thier play time will just be death after death because someone has another account running a 500mil t3c for their 3 mil kestrel vs their own low sp kestrel. As for older people using links, lol risk adverse little s----. Enjoy dying to my griffin fleets!
>>> This is true!!!, off grid links sucks!
Crosi Wesdo wrote: Every new player should have all fitting skills at 4, tank skills to 3 and all their chosen racial ship skills (up to BS) to 3 along with their racial weapon and weapon support skills. The game is far too old to expect people to start from scratch, even with the new player SP tweak recently.
Removing links will result in an initial plummet of sub numbers that will never be replaced by new newbs who never knew links existed anyway and who are still gonna get dunked by more experienced players. Nor will they be replaced by the whiners who more than likely quit due to burn out but their own lack of introspection leads them point fingers and blame everything else.
-People blobbing up slightly more. -Large alpha fleets will continue their resurgence with links being removed from grid within 10 seconds of the fight starting. -Lerger entities who can field more than half a dozen CS will have the enjoyable task of swapping out booster alts on the fly as theirs die. Or at least have many CS on field to minimise the chance of losing their boosts. -Fights returning to gates where CS can jump and reapproach. -Medium+ t1 cruiser fights being a brutal and fast dps race where logi, particularly armour have no chance to lock and cycle before anything dies.
No, New players to EVE need to be enlighted into 3 easy to follow rules.
1. Choose carefuly your training skills. for pvp, mining, industry, missions, etc... because it takes TIME!, focus 1 goal tree path of ships or whatever.
2. Security status mechanics!!! which are very important in high, low and null sec.
3. Never but never fly ships u cant easily replace!
>>> removing links will remove those who abuse links, but not all of them. LINKS are insanely strong for small numbers and less important for large numbers vs small.
In even fights they are also critical. Maybe on grid links could be fitted with a special bastion module only active when links are active!
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1600
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 14:21:44 -
[126] - Quote
You misunderstand.
I was commenting on the argument that eve is dying because of OGB. OGB has next to no negative impact on sub numbers or new player retention.
I was also saying that those people who do not want to field an expensive commandship in a risky cruiser fight day after day will fight without links and there will be a culture shock for how those fights play out. Command destroyers can only use one link which will be the resist ones. That will not make logis life much easier as numbers grow.
Finally i was saying that larger fights in larger hulls are going to be a one dimensional alpha shot of potential hostile boosts resulting in a slam dunk of the rest of the fleet.
In most fights if one side gets a couple of wrecking shots on the hostile booster and the other doesnt. The fights p.much over and everyone can go home;
"Boosts are down" "Deagress/bail"
So no, my post was not about how OGB are good for the game, it was about how grid boosting will change the game.
My actual argument is that boosts should be removed completely rather than putting them on grid which only gives advantage to whoever is the largest gang in space. |
Liam Inkuras
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
1623
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 15:49:31 -
[127] - Quote
Help to a Garmur in the novice )))
I wear my goggles at night.
Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone
|
Ragged Starkiller
Hoplite Brigade
7
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 15:51:56 -
[128] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Ragged, as a counter argument. Links are the only reason i will engage massively outnumbered.
Also, while true, the tired lessons you have for new players are a little bit generic and simplistic. They have been in place for years and have done nothing for new player retention.
As someone who makes new alts every month or so, im faced with how unfit for purpose the default UI is. The extra skills im suggesting will give new players an expanded sense of purpose which i would expect can only deliver good things for player retention.
I agree that the game is old, I disagree regarding the skills. I think the skill que is fine.
why?. If a newcomer can focus skill training for a single purpose, within 1 month or 2 he can master that task. lets say incursion, pvp with a shiptype, mission runner, etc ...
The so tired lessons, are always heard but not used that often. I think that the appeal of EVE is the variation in game-style you can do. I think the most appealing characteristic CCP can do is upgrade the missions. Change the difficulty when is done in fleets and when it's done solo. Yes, for experienced players you have the burner missions, that's beautiful. For new players you still have a bunch of missions that became repetitive after a couple of runes.
NPC Pockets can be more separated in space 200-300km one from each other, more NPCs that use some sort of strategy that can be cracked down but makes the game appealing. Now we have easier manual piloting and soon 1st person view camera of the ship. This new-coming features should have as companying interesting more variate mission design.
Check the missions of Freelancer, or elite dangerous or other spaceship games. There is a lack of feeling involving the player with the story in the current missions. Maybe a sound play of the mission description. I'm not an expert in game development but I have played video-games for almost 20 years now and I feel like EVE is missing that exiting environment for new players. That feel overwhelmed by the experienced players.
The missions should put in practice specific skills for flying the ship, like afterburner or microwarpdrive, why not make missions that makes u use AB or where the npcs are kiting (2km/s speed) and u need to catch them. I'm sure there are many many ways of improve mission running. Mining, etc ... BONUS rewards that pop when you something like defend ur mining barge from some npc frigs and you got a bonus of 5% faster mining for 10 minutes or something similar. Missions that involve fight on a gate and watch your timers, defend a transport ship passing thought gates, fight on stations, and many many more variants that I'm sure is not hard to code, because I know how to code, so on ...
EVE is a great and fun game when you have the patience to learn the mechanics and deal with the community. For new players that want to have insta fun without learning for months, the missions should reflect all game mechanics, mjd, active reping, buffer fits, fits for exploration, for kite, to brawl, to deal with neuts, how to deal with security standings, etc etc ...
NEW, MORE COMPELLING, FRESH, MECHANIC TEACHING MISSION ARE A MUST AND EVE IS LACKING OF THEM.
if you could make the player involved with the game at a personal level, and make farmer have fun with it, EVE will retain way more people than other games.
What makes a game retain players, 1. gameplay, 2, graphics, 3, pvp, 4, comunity.
|
Lulu Lunette
Akheteru Integrated Astrometrics Hedonistic Imperative
122
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 15:55:03 -
[129] - Quote
lol
@lunettelulu7
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1600
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 15:56:20 -
[130] - Quote
Rugged, hey mate. Join this game and in a month or two you could do one thing that you want. Its easy for people like myself wity 130m SP+ to forget how absurd the waiting is in this game for skills. That is only getting harder as the old guard are hitting 300m SP ballpark. Asking people to start with a couple hundred thousand SP and 14 years behind is a big ask.
Doesnt sound very appealing does it?
The proven way to get people to stick with this game is not PVE. The proven way to get people to enjoy the game is not shooting red crosses at all. Its giving them the opportunity to fly with other people who can teach them the game faster than any red cross. |
|
Ragged Starkiller
Hoplite Brigade
7
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 16:24:21 -
[131] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Rugged, hey mate. Join this game and in a month or two you could do one thing that you want. Its easy for people like myself wity 130m SP+ to forget how absurd the waiting is in this game for skills. That is only getting harder as the old guard are hitting 300m SP ballpark. Asking people to start with a couple hundred thousand SP and 14 years behind is a big ask.
Doesnt sound very appealing does it?
The proven way to get people to stick with this game is not PVE. The proven way to get people to enjoy the game is not shooting red crosses at all. Its giving them the opportunity to fly with other people who can teach them the game faster than any red cross.
it's a scale thing. I agree that SP can be absurd. I agree with your idea of reduce SP and focus skills... making easier to max out something. but this is not the main issue.
I invited a friend to EVE, we played together for 6 months. He loved fly cheap low SP frigate and hunt npcs in null because it was challenging and fun. he found PVP exhausting due links, OP ships, poor detail on how mechanics work. We run lv4s and after two weeks he got bored of the PVE, shortly after he quit.
PVE is the most appealing thing for NEWPLAYERS, PVP is awesome in teams (blob as everyone call it). SP are realy hard to work on but its interesting WORK to fly a gigantic spaceship.
this is why although I agree with you that SP are an issue, they have little to do with player retention. Fallout 3, took me 1 year to cmplete and max out a character in a way I wanted. I never felt the sensation the skiling was low. and it took 1 year and its a freaking solo pve game.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1600
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 16:36:09 -
[132] - Quote
Im saying make it easier to have the minimum skills for something on day one. Maxing out skills and cross training will take nearly as long as it ever would.
And honestly, i dont see any logic to any of your posts. Comparing FO3 to EVE? Seriously? People stick with eve for PVE? Really?
EVE is not at all famous for its PVE content. Its infamous if anything, and not in a good way. |
Johnny Riko
Jump Drive Appreciation Society Test Alliance Please Ignore
99
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 17:10:48 -
[133] - Quote
Sorry, from the tone of your post I thought you were implying that offgrid boosts shouldn't be removed.
While I agree that even on-grid boosts should have their effectiveness/influence toned down, I don't think it should be removed completely. Yes it encourages tactics where the biggest blob of ships is going to take down the enemy booster and then gain a significant advantage, but that isn't any different in my opinion from blobs eliminating enemy logistics. The fact of the matter is that EVE is largely based around numbers. Where two fleet compositions neutralise each other, the biggest fleet is the one that wins most of the time, I don't think having on-grid boosts is something that will change that. IMO the advantage has always been to whoever has the largest gang.
I wanna join up. I think I got what it takes to be a Citizen.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1600
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 17:22:17 -
[134] - Quote
Dont get me wrong, id rather boosts stay as they are. But if given 2 options, removing them completely would seem far more preferable than not being able to field them against larger fleets all else being equal.
Well, not that you cant field them, but losing a 400m isk commandship a few times a night would be pretty tedious. |
Johnny Riko
Jump Drive Appreciation Society Test Alliance Please Ignore
99
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 17:56:46 -
[135] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Dont get me wrong, id rather boosts stay as they are. But if given 2 options, removing them completely would seem far more preferable than not being able to field them against larger fleets all else being equal. Well, not that you cant field them, but losing a 400m isk commandship a few times a night would be pretty tedious. As for the advantage to larger gangs, as ive said many times, i use boosts to harass fleets while vastly outnumbered. People complain about the garmur, but ive been doing this for a long time now. Ill happily warp into 30-40 people inside a plex and take my chances with boosts. Doesnt always work out. But without boosts, it will often just be a pointless exercise.
I don't get it. Why should a "solo" pilot in a single ship be able to engage a much larger force and not get obliterated?
I wanna join up. I think I got what it takes to be a Citizen.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1601
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 18:08:08 -
[136] - Quote
Specialised fits. Also, i didnt exactly obliterate them either. Just harass.
Links just make more options viable. |
Johnny Riko
Jump Drive Appreciation Society Test Alliance Please Ignore
99
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 18:33:11 -
[137] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Specialised fits. Also, i didnt exactly obliterate them either. Just harass.
Links just make more options viable.
Do you think it should not be possible to fight outnumbered?
Of course you should be able to fight outnumbered. But it should be down to piloting skill/tactics, and ship fitting. It shouldn't be down to having a magic boost to everything just because you have someone in fleet 50 AU away providing links.
I wanna join up. I think I got what it takes to be a Citizen.
|
Ragged Starkiller
Hoplite Brigade
7
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 19:14:19 -
[138] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Specialised fits. Also, i didnt exactly obliterate them either. Just harass.
Links just make more options viable.
Do you think it should not be possible to fight outnumbered?
lol, you are stuborn as any eve player ... and obviously you didnt got the idea of what I was talking about...
yes fighting outnumbered is possible. 1 against many, why not ... its fun, but off grid links are just absurd..
|
Markus Lionum
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 20:05:12 -
[139] - Quote
Great freaking job CCP are you insane putting links on grid? You are killing solo pvp for alot of people if you implement this!! |
Titus Heldane
Militaris Industries Northern Coalition.
34
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 20:07:37 -
[140] - Quote
Markus Lionum wrote:Great freaking job CCP are you insane putting links on grid? You are killing solo pvp for alot of people if you implement this!!
i hope this is a troll post |
|
Markus Lionum
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 20:26:51 -
[141] - Quote
Titus Heldane wrote:Markus Lionum wrote:Great freaking job CCP are you insane putting links on grid? You are killing solo pvp for alot of people if you implement this!! i hope this is a troll post
and you are corect.
I for one, as a enthusiastic sport pvp'er in FW areas, welcome this change with open arms. Been playing since 2008 and hated OGB since day 1 I pvp'ed.
Latelly i started fielding a gnosis with T1 links - even with that I felt OP and I will hapilly give it up as long as every1 else does the same. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
759
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 21:16:47 -
[142] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Special fits. Also, i didnt exactly obliterate them either. Just harass. Links just make more options viable.
Do you think it should not be possible to fight outnumbered?
If the only way to fight outnumbered is to buy a second account and drag around a cloaky boosting pet...that is bad gameplay. I question the notion that you can't fight outnumbered without links. I have done it. It's harder. You have to choose your fights carefully and craft a fitting carefully to the task. You should still be able to dance around an enemy blob with a HG snaked speed fit garmur. It will entail more risk and require better piloting and be more susceptible to counters.
This is an MMO. One player is not supposed to be able to hold the field against a 30 man blob indefinitely. If the only way to do that is to run an AFK buff pet on a second account, then something needs fixing.
You are literally saying that being able to fight outnumbered is a function of whether or not you sub a links toon rather than player skill and decision-making. Don't you see anything wrong with that?
You shouldn't be able to effectively harass a 30 man fleet just because you pay a second account and for whatever reason no one in that fleet does.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1601
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 21:22:20 -
[143] - Quote
If the 30 man blob doesnt have a probing alt then i would suggest that they came ill prepared.
A lot of the time all you have to do is throw up a half-assed probe box to make hostile boosts go away lol. |
Arla Sarain
709
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 21:33:45 -
[144] - Quote
You can fight outnumbered without links. About the only thing that hasn't been said.
You can now and you will be later.
You'll have less margin for error, but the kite/damp fest isn't exclusive to encounters with links involved. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1601
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 21:55:32 -
[145] - Quote
I never said that people can fight links without links or probes. I never spoke to that at all.
I said that if people feel that they cannot fight linked pilots then they can use probes instead. Most of the time the booster is a more expensive kill anyway.
Whats the word for calling someone a hypocrite based on something they never said?
The main problem i will encounter without links, is the plex mechanics themselves. I use links to clear scrams on the warp in. I will warp in to most things and have a go.
Without links i will simply see a gang in a plex and have to go to a different plex and either wait for them to leave and undo the contested rate they accrued by completing my own plex or wait for them to warp in to me.
Also, im not saying that without links its impossible to breach a plex in a kite ship. Im just saying its probably not worth testing it most of the time only to give away effortless kills to a blob at zero on the warp in. |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
1112
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 23:39:42 -
[146] - Quote
D0nci wrote:The whiners won, they'll be removing OGB in the next few months.
This is confusing. OGB has been slated for removal for, literally, years. They've never hemmed or hawed or played this one close to the vest in the slightest. There were technical limitations that were waiting on BIAB.
BIAB is now here. What did you think was going to happen?
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
759
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 00:44:00 -
[147] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:I never said that people can fight links without links or probes. I never spoke to that at all.
I said that if people feel that they cannot fight linked pilots then they can use probes instead. Most of the time the booster is a more expensive kill anyway.
Whats the word for calling someone a hypocrite based on something they never said?
The main problem i will encounter without links, is the plex mechanics themselves. I use links to clear scrams on the warp in. I will warp in to most things and have a go.
Without links i will simply see a gang in a plex and have to go to a different plex and either wait for them to leave and undo the contested rate they accrued by completing my own plex or wait for them to warp in to me.
Also, im not saying that without links its impossible to breach a plex in a kite ship. Im just saying its probably not worth testing it most of the time only to give away effortless kills to a blob at zero on the warp in.
A properly fit garmur with HG Snakes should still be able to slide a plex, especially vs unlinked opponents. It will be riskier to make rhat choice. That aspect of plex warfare is literally the only thing that makes AB brawling/scram kiting fits even viable. And you well know there are options for engaging multiple opponents even in a small or novice if one has significant resources to invest and some imagination. Drugs and implants are very powerful; they are just far more balanced from a risk/reward perspective. You may not be able to warp in on a 30 man blob with competent tackle on the button and frankly I don't think you should be able to.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1601
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 01:07:17 -
[148] - Quote
So the blob sit in one plex, and i sit in another waiting for them to never come. Win-win, wait... lol. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
759
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 02:07:11 -
[149] - Quote
I've successfully slid plexes in a slicer only doing 5700 heated. Garmur with HG Snakes should get what, 9k? Still very possible but now there will be some risk. Maybe you can use a cheaper kite ship and use the RF garmur for fleet support, a role for which it is really good even without links.
I've looked at your fit. It surpasses 10k with heat, and points/locks/shoots out to 70k. You don't find that slightly broken? You think the cancer ship kite meta is good for the game? God forbid people have to run their nano kite gangs with a margin of error that's actually relevant. |
Oreb Wing
Black Fox Marauders
120
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 02:18:33 -
[150] - Quote
Sensor boosted Maulus is like 3 mil bro. If it can damp an Orthrus, it can damp a Garmur.
There is no grey area when the light of reason directs wisdom
|
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1603
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 02:39:48 -
[151] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:I've successfully slid plexes in a slicer only doing 5700 heated. Garmur with HG Snakes should get what, 9k? Still very possible but now there will be some risk. Maybe you can use a cheaper kite ship and use the RF garmur for fleet support, a role for which it is really good even without links.
I've looked at your fit. It surpasses 10k with heat, and points/locks/shoots out to 70k. You don't find that slightly broken? You think the cancer ship kite meta is good for the game? God forbid people have to run their nano kite gangs with a margin of error that's actually relevant.
There is no denying the snaked linked garmur is powerful.
Do you want to balance the game based on an edge case?
People have nightmares about edge cases, but they really are not as common as people who wake up in sweats think. |
Kalo Askold
Sanguis Inceptum
19
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 03:55:00 -
[152] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:So the blob sit in one plex, and i sit in another waiting for them to never come. Win-win, wait... lol.
That or have a ungunned jackdaw like hull (25-30k) ehp ongrid link ship instead of sitting 30km from a pos surrounded by friendly guns.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1603
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 04:28:54 -
[153] - Quote
Kalo Askold wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:So the blob sit in one plex, and i sit in another waiting for them to never come. Win-win, wait... lol. That or have a ungunned jackdaw like hull (25-30k) ehp ongrid link ship instead of sitting 30km from a pos surrounded by friendly guns.
I forgive your extreme ignorance of how eve mechanics work in FW lowsec. |
Thanatos Marathon
Black Fox Marauders
588
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 05:17:04 -
[154] - Quote
4 moar dead boosters today. Including those surrounded by "friendly guns".
If you don't like them, just kill em while you wait for OGB to go away.
Black Fox Marauders is Recruiting
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1603
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 05:28:09 -
[155] - Quote
Thanatos Marathon wrote:4 moar dead boosters today. Including those surrounded by "friendly guns".
If you don't like them, just kill em while you wait for OGB to go away.
Thats just impossible. Boosts are god mode. And expecting people to invest a fraction of SP in killing boosts as boosters do in boosting is fractally imbalanced.
They are always aligned, they are always dscanning, they are always immune to your will. |
JetStream Drenard
Black Fox Marauders
71
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 06:25:14 -
[156] - Quote
LOL |
Markus Lionum
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 09:31:08 -
[157] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote: ..............
I remember you - you doing tha ghei maulus thing for years now - you had your fun now move on or go shoot the jita monument.
Your tears fills my soul with joy. |
Davir Sometaww
Black Fox Marauders
62
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 11:11:51 -
[158] - Quote
Markus Lionum wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote: .............. I remember you - you doing tha ghei maulus thing for years now - you had your fun now move on or go shoot the jita monument. Your tears fills my soul with joy.
It just encourages the N+1 blob mechanic. If you think that its going to fix anything, it is really only going to make eve worse.
You'd think after the limited information we are getting about Capitals - and how "Fozzie Sov" was a complete flop - which led to subscription account decrease - that they would take a pause before considering what the hell to do.
Yes links suck, but they enable these things to happen:
1.) Engagement against higher numbers. 2.) In FW - ability to engage in scenarios you would otherwise run away from. 3.) Incursions 4.) WH Space PVE
Ways you can counter links: 1.) Invest skill points on probing. Often times, the link ship is a more successful and juicy kill. 2.) Bring your own link ship. 3.) Tornado 4.) Many more ways!
WHY this change is stupid
1.) HELLO FALCON AND ROOK. You thought dealing with link alts were bad, wait till you see my x2 falcons/rooks.
2.) Why give "content" when I know that your blob of N+1 is greater than mine? Why fight when I know you can guard your links more. This encourages the Goonswarm 5 to 1 mentality.
3.) Well, RIP to WH fun. Already such a dwindling population, and with the new changes...not even worth the effort.
|
Longdrinks
Anime Masters Baka Legion
216
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 11:53:32 -
[159] - Quote
Eve was kill when i could no longer dunk on Noobs with 7k garmur in novice plex |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1603
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 13:03:14 -
[160] - Quote
Markus Lionum wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote: .............. I remember you - you doing tha ghei maulus thing for years now - you had your fun now move on or go shoot the jita monument. Your tears fills my soul with joy.
Not sure where i was crying. Im perfectly cross trained on both chars. Im just pointing out that the changes will have a much greater effect than just fixing solo pvp for thekestrel/p[unisher meta. |
|
Markus Lionum
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 13:27:11 -
[161] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
And apologies
Apologies accepted |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
759
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 16:15:57 -
[162] - Quote
Longdrinks wrote:Eve was kill when i could no longer dunk on Noobs with 7k garmur in novice plex
7k is a garmur with no links/snakes, just heated MWD. Lol. Try 10k.
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
759
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 16:26:07 -
[163] - Quote
Davir Sometaww wrote:Markus Lionum wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote: .............. I remember you - you doing tha ghei maulus thing for years now - you had your fun now move on or go shoot the jita monument. Your tears fills my soul with joy. It just encourages the N+1 blob mechanic. If you think that its going to fix anything, it is really only going to make eve worse. You'd think after the limited information we are getting about Capitals - and how "Fozzie Sov" was a complete flop - which led to subscription account decrease - that they would take a pause before considering what the hell to do. Yes links suck, but they enable these things to happen:1.) Engagement against higher numbers. 2.) In FW - ability to engage in scenarios you would otherwise run away from. 3.) Incursions 4.) WH Space PVE Ways you can counter links:1.) Invest skill points on probing. Often times, the link ship is a more successful and juicy kill. 2.) Bring your own link ship. 3.) Tornado 4.) Many more ways! WHY this change is stupid1.) HELLO FALCON AND ROOK. You thought dealing with link alts were bad, wait till you see my x2 falcons/rooks. 2.) Why give "content" when I know that your blob of N+1 is greater than mine? Why fight when I know you can guard your links more. This encourages the Goonswarm 5 to 1 mentality. 3.) Well, RIP to WH fun. Already such a dwindling population, and with the new changes...not even worth the effort.
These mythical "fight the blob" encounters consist solely of linked nano kite fits killing off stragglers. Let's not deceive ourselves. And why would I bring a nado or prober? If I have to bring a second account to compete, OGB is the obvious choice. Links being killable with an outsized investment of resources doesn't make them balanced. All this has been addressed. You are not supposed to be able to hold field against a blob just because you bought a second account.
PvE will adapt. Many have argued that both incursions and high class WH's pay too much; no one will cry over shaving a bit off the top there.
Also, good luck fitting your recon into a novice plex. Best you're getting is a cloaked griffin, which shows on killmails. I predict few people will go to that much trouble and they will quickly find themselves watchlisted and blueballed. Mediums are already notorious recon traps so no surprises there. Killmails once again.
Some people are gonna have to learn to actually fly their spaceships. It's going to be glorious. Novice plexes are going to be the best places in EVE.
|
D0nci
Ten Below Zero
1
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 17:04:26 -
[164] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:These mythical "fight the blob" encounters consist solely of linked nano kite fits killing off stragglers. Let's not deceive ourselves. And why would I bring a nado or prober? If I have to bring a second account to compete, OGB is the obvious choice. Links being killable with an outsized investment of resources doesn't make them balanced. All this has been addressed. You are not supposed to be able to hold field against a blob just because you bought a second account.
PvE will adapt. Many have argued that both incursions and high class WH's pay too much; no one will cry over shaving a bit off the top there.
Also, good luck fitting your recon into a novice plex. Best you're getting is a cloaked griffin, which shows on killmails. I predict few people will go to that much trouble and they will quickly find themselves watchlisted and blueballed. Mediums are already notorious recon traps so no surprises there. Killmails once again.
Some people are gonna have to learn to actually fly their spaceships. It's going to be glorious. Novice plexes are going to be the best places in EVE.
Dude, you are so tunnel visioned around novice/small plexes in FW territory. The game consists of so much more environments that people PVP in. Time to wake up. Just 'cuz you are losing a 'honorable' 1v1 frig fight vs a boosted player in the smallest of FW plexes doesn't justify the removal of links, nor will the latter ad more or better content to the rest of the EVE universe. All the counter arguments made by the pro-OGB dudes here are valid and some even mentioned a number of ways to deal with boosted players.
For WH and Incursion content, I can say it won't change anything. Incursion runners use boosters for convenience/over protection, they don't really need them stat wise. Incrusion income is stupidly high because of the near 0 risk vs high reward mechanics. Buy a blinged out marauder or faction BS and you are good to go for the 100-150m/h train. What OGB removal will do for Incursions is just that they will bring 1-2 more logi in to the fleet. No issue, income will stay the same. As for high class wormholes(C4-C5) it will hurt players running these sites but it wont cripple them. I regularly do C5 Garrisons and even some Relics with my Golem w/ Loki boost. Removal of OGB will just force me to buy X-type booster and A-type invul, and I'll have the same tank as with boost. And these mods are only marginally more expensive than my booster Loki. No issue here either 300m/h will still be a thing for the dedicated.
On the "mythical fight the blob encounters" topic: check out Mr.Hydes videos on YT or the Samurai Revenge series (a bit older). If you don't change your mind after these then I am truly sorry for you. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
759
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 17:15:00 -
[165] - Quote
Your tears are delicious.
Mr. Hyde only gets to make videos because people don't know what Bhaalgorns and Falcons are for. |
D0nci
Ten Below Zero
1
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 17:41:48 -
[166] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Your tears are delicious.
Mr. Hyde only gets to make videos because people don't know what Bhaalgorns and Falcons are for. The only crying here is from you m8, rest of us are too busy making arguments.
Also NOT using neut/ecm ships on someone makes that someone not a good pilot? Much reasoning, such logic, wow. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
759
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 17:55:41 -
[167] - Quote
D0nci wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Your tears are delicious.
Mr. Hyde only gets to make videos because people don't know what Bhaalgorns and Falcons are for. The only crying here is from you m8, rest of us are too busy making arguments. Also NOT using neut/ecm ships on someone makes that someone not a good pilot? Much reasoning, such logic, wow.
All the arguments you made have been repeatedly disposed of.
I never said he wasn't a good pilot. But a single ship is extremely easy to shut down or force off field; staging that sort of encounter requires finding a blob that is either incompetent to the extreme or composed of the honorable warriors you so scorn.
If it's a marauder, bring geddons - anything else, bring jams. Fight over. Generating that type of fight requires finding opponents who won't immediately undock things designed to turn off your spaceship.
|
Davir Sometaww
Black Fox Marauders
64
|
Posted - 2015.11.28 20:26:19 -
[168] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Davir Sometaww wrote:Markus Lionum wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote: .............. I remember you - you doing tha ghei maulus thing for years now - you had your fun now move on or go shoot the jita monument. Your tears fills my soul with joy. It just encourages the N+1 blob mechanic. If you think that its going to fix anything, it is really only going to make eve worse. You'd think after the limited information we are getting about Capitals - and how "Fozzie Sov" was a complete flop - which led to subscription account decrease - that they would take a pause before considering what the hell to do. Yes links suck, but they enable these things to happen:1.) Engagement against higher numbers. 2.) In FW - ability to engage in scenarios you would otherwise run away from. 3.) Incursions 4.) WH Space PVE Ways you can counter links:1.) Invest skill points on probing. Often times, the link ship is a more successful and juicy kill. 2.) Bring your own link ship. 3.) Tornado 4.) Many more ways! WHY this change is stupid1.) HELLO FALCON AND ROOK. You thought dealing with link alts were bad, wait till you see my x2 falcons/rooks. 2.) Why give "content" when I know that your blob of N+1 is greater than mine? Why fight when I know you can guard your links more. This encourages the Goonswarm 5 to 1 mentality. 3.) Well, RIP to WH fun. Already such a dwindling population, and with the new changes...not even worth the effort. These mythical "fight the blob" encounters consist solely of linked nano kite fits killing off stragglers. Let's not deceive ourselves. And why would I bring a nado or prober? If I have to bring a second account to compete, OGB is the obvious choice. Links being killable with an outsized investment of resources doesn't make them balanced. All this has been addressed. You are not supposed to be able to hold field against a blob just because you bought a second account. PvE will adapt. Many have argued that both incursions and high class WH's pay too much; no one will cry over shaving a bit off the top there. Also, good luck fitting your recon into a novice plex. Best you're getting is a cloaked griffin, which shows on killmails. I predict few people will go to that much trouble and they will quickly find themselves watchlisted and blueballed. Mediums are already notorious recon traps so no surprises there. Killmails once again. Some people are gonna have to learn to actually fly their spaceships. It's going to be glorious. Novice plexes are going to be the best places in EVE.
You mean its either you get a fight - or get blue balled. Crosi Wesdo explained it much better than I. Clearly you need to read his points.
|
ARMED1
The Coven's Spoon Corner Pub Bad Intention
77
|
Posted - 2015.11.29 02:29:48 -
[169] - Quote
Off grid links exist bc CCP has allowed them to. I guess they see it as a net gain since a link alt means another account sub for them. Too bad they didnt see it being detrimental to the game in general - but it seems they might be fixing that soon as well. Will be fun to see the on grid booster again! I for one will enjoy being primaried and bait tanking as my fleet tears apart the enemy. |
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
269
|
Posted - 2015.11.29 03:19:57 -
[170] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:Calm down everyone. Boosters are moving on grid in the fall of 2016.
t3 boosters will lose a bit more ooomph and the tankier command ships will get a leg up.
How could they? OGB should remain in Eve Foreverrrrrrrrrrrrrr.
|
|
Burtakus
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
40
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 20:34:27 -
[171] - Quote
Wow....the level of whine is amazing.
Are ogb used and abused.......without a doubt. Are they a cancer on the game......not at all.
The biggest cancer in eve is the requirements for n+1 and the risk averse blob mentality it creates on both sides of the blob.
Forcing links on grid will only feed this cancer. I am one of the lucky ones who's ogb frees me of this risk aversness and enables me to attempt a fight outgunned and/or out numbered, in shield or armor, kite or brawl.
I forsee the days of old when my link alt goes back to e-war support. Considering she is near perfect e-war and has EAF 5 and Recon 5 I suppose folks can have something else to whine about. On the plus side this may get me back into being an FC and bringing my own blob with me.
|
Samwise Everquest
Run and Gun Mercenary Corps FETID
169
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 22:37:00 -
[172] - Quote
Ogb was ********. Glad to see it go.
Run and Gun Mercenary Corps looking for work. Pras Phil.
|
Samwise Everquest
Run and Gun Mercenary Corps FETID
169
|
Posted - 2015.11.30 22:50:18 -
[173] - Quote
Burtakus wrote:Wow....the level of whine is amazing.
Are ogb used and abused.......without a doubt. Are they a cancer on the game......not at all.
The biggest cancer in eve is the requirements for n+1 and the risk averse blob mentality it creates on both sides of the blob.
Forcing links on grid will only feed this cancer. I am one of the lucky ones who's ogb frees me of this risk aversness and enables me to attempt a fight outgunned and/or out numbered, in shield or armor, kite or brawl.
I forsee the days of old when my link alt goes back to e-war support. Considering she is near perfect e-war and has EAF 5 and Recon 5 I suppose folks can have something else to whine about. On the plus side this may get me back into being an FC and bringing my own blob with me.
complains about n+1 mentality, uses n+1 mentality.
Run and Gun Mercenary Corps looking for work. Pras Phil.
|
Burtakus
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
41
|
Posted - 2015.12.01 17:26:29 -
[174] - Quote
Samwise Everquest wrote:Burtakus wrote:Wow....the level of whine is amazing.
Are ogb used and abused.......without a doubt. Are they a cancer on the game......not at all.
The biggest cancer in eve is the requirements for n+1 and the risk averse blob mentality it creates on both sides of the blob.
Forcing links on grid will only feed this cancer. I am one of the lucky ones who's ogb frees me of this risk aversness and enables me to attempt a fight outgunned and/or out numbered, in shield or armor, kite or brawl.
I forsee the days of old when my link alt goes back to e-war support. Considering she is near perfect e-war and has EAF 5 and Recon 5 I suppose folks can have something else to whine about. On the plus side this may get me back into being an FC and bringing my own blob with me.
complains about n+1 mentality, uses n+1 mentality.
Not sure if your response is legit or an attempt to troll.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1616
|
Posted - 2015.12.01 18:44:18 -
[175] - Quote
Samwise Everquest wrote: complains about n+1 mentality, uses whatever will be effective come what may. Even if there are less options to be effective.
FTFY |
Samwise Everquest
Run and Gun Mercenary Corps FETID
180
|
Posted - 2015.12.01 18:58:39 -
[176] - Quote
Burtakus wrote:Not sure if your response is legit or an attempt to troll.
Not sure if you are an idiot just act like one in EvE.
Run and Gun Mercenary Corps looking for work. Pras Phil.
|
Kaska Iskalar
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.01 23:49:16 -
[177] - Quote
RonPaul Rox wrote:the same reason T2 BPOs exist, if ccp makes a bad decision that will anger people if they fix it, they dont fix it This is the correct answer, unfortunately. I miss the original CCP. The OG devs would do something. The only time they ever responded to butthurt was when M0o was gate camping high sec. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
895
|
Posted - 2015.12.02 00:22:40 -
[178] - Quote
Don't worry. People will be complaining about T3Ds and T2 Frig Logi in a few weeks. Both of which can easily fit cruiser ABs and still be viable. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
762
|
Posted - 2015.12.02 04:10:50 -
[179] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:Don't worry. People will be complaining about T3Ds and T2 Frig Logi in a few weeks. Both of which can easily fit cruiser ABs and still be viable.
T3D's will be so much less cancerous without links. Except the Hecate, which is **** even with links. But the Svipul benefits massively from speed and shield links and without them will be far more reasonable.
|
Burtakus
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
41
|
Posted - 2015.12.02 20:22:12 -
[180] - Quote
Samwise Everquest wrote:Burtakus wrote:Not sure if your response is legit or an attempt to troll. Not sure if you are an idiot just act like one in EvE. heh noticed you fly around in a Svipul with links and you want to talk about cancer? Also good job losing a bil pod on the Jita undock like a moron. I think I am done here. Later scrub.
Nice job devolving to name calling.
That Svipul that you complain about gets kills without links. 99% of my Svipul kills were without links so nice try at basing your emotional response on a false assumption.
As for the pod, yeah I lost a bill pod. Not the first and not the last. Implants were replaced within ten minutes and due to game issues I successfully petitioned CCP and got the ship and Implants returned a day later. Not really seeing the point of your statement other than to act out.
If your reading comprehension and logical reasoning skills were reasonably good you would have understood that my initial post was that I use 1 + 1 ( myself and a link alt) to increase my engagement profile to small gangs that have me outnumbered and often outshipped. In simple terms this means I can get more PVP faster because I can engage more targets as opposed to running away. |
|
Andre Vauban
Aideron Robotics
442
|
Posted - 2015.12.02 20:40:34 -
[181] - Quote
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.
.
|
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
39
|
Posted - 2015.12.04 03:37:16 -
[182] - Quote
Well this thread has some legs.
A lot of good feedback.
Firstly, so that not everything is a whine, let me say that CCP are a company that employs a lot of artists and engineers to create and update a pretty special experience. So, I don't think it is reasonable to threaten to take the ball and go home, and quit because links are a ****** mechanic demonstrating questionable values.
Eve is great, CCP are great. On balance.
So the question is how eve can be made better. Another question is "Will Eve survive in a competitive market if it doesn't address obvious problems?"
I think everyone agrees that the more people who play Eve, the better it will be. That is certainly true for CCP.
You all should take note that CCP just raised 30 million in venture capital for the Valkyrie promotion next quarter. If you don't know what that means, it means CCP are betting the farm on Valkyrie, so let's all hope it goes well, or Eve is probably toast.
I hope that my whining about CCP and links can be taken in the context of concern for the bottom line. Without a positive bottom line, every good deed is a mere intention, and every evil is a necessity.
If we want new players to come into Eve and HAVE FUN.... right... then we cannot push mechanics that suit a lone wolf with 10 years SP and an alt that uses dark magic to destroy new players. Or at least not, everywhere.
Some of you made the point that links have a place in null sec. Well, I wouldn't know about that, but it seems reasonable and if it is true then let null sec gamers keep links, by all means.
I do not wish to change the game to take away the space that more experienced players enjoy. All I want is to make sure that the new players have room to enjoy some "moderately fair" pvp.
Now I know there is nothing moderately fair about Eve, and that this is part of the charm. And that is all good. But the ass hattery needs to be financially transparent, or the game itself becomes a commercial scam. Nobody, anywhere, ever kept a commercial scam going indefinitely.
We need to think about what we are going to tell new players that we introduce to the game. I am bringing a new player in this week.
So what I am going to tell him?
I'm going to tell him that Eve is great, that it is like a zoo for malign and socially ****** monkies with relatively high IQs. I am going to tell him that CCP is a real company that employs real people to keep the game fresh.
I am going to tell him that he can have huge pvp fun in FW, so long as he keeps close to a few buddies.
It is a huge relief to me that I can tell him that off grid boosters were a ******** mechanic from the past that CCP are finally fixing.
Some other folsks mentioned the N+1 mechanic and for sure that is a real thing.
Again, let's try and make some space for the solo and small gang pvpers who don't enjoy getting blobbed. That doesn't mean nerfing camps, camps are a legitimate part of eve. So are blobs.
But that doesn't mean we can't make room for the new folks who will stay with the game and subscribe so long as they can have some fun without getting a degree in bitterness first.
It isn't about who can ***** and moan, because everyone does and few have the skill.
It is all about getting new players involved, and into the fiery crucible in which all true heroes are forged. (FW) |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1619
|
Posted - 2015.12.04 05:40:32 -
[183] - Quote
Its called high sec mate. If you really cared about the new players who are averse to imbalance you would point them in the direction of RvB.
New players really shouldnt expect to have good results in solo pvp. The scales are tipped massively against them. They should be encouraged to join a corp to learn from and fly with.
As i have said before, new players die to almost everyone, boosts or not. Boosts have very little impact on player retention. Most people who get turbo dunked by boosted l33t pvpers dont even know what happened, nor do they know the difference from when they got turbo dunked by someone who wasnt boosted.
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. |
greg01
The Church of Awesome
46
|
Posted - 2015.12.04 13:03:45 -
[184] - Quote
Sadly, I have to agree with Crosi on this one. Now I am going to have to drink a stiff alcoholic beverage to get over the shame of this. But, he's got some good points! 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?
CCP you really shouldn't change the goal posts after the game has started. People have invested a lot of time and money into their alts. |
Burtakus
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
41
|
Posted - 2015.12.04 14:57:52 -
[185] - Quote
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. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
905
|
Posted - 2015.12.04 15:12:07 -
[186] - Quote
Well, being on grid shouldn't be too bad. Since the grid is now 7800km.
And per the patch notes for upcoming release on Dec 8th:
- Lowered the amount of jamming NPC's in all ten Gallente level 4 Factional Warfare missions.
- Fast webbing frigates have been added to all Caldari and Minmatar level 4 Factional Warfare mission sites.
- Tech 3 Destroyers are now forbidden to enter Small Factional Warfare sites.
Full Patch Notes |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
768
|
Posted - 2015.12.04 22:09:49 -
[187] - Quote
Burtakus wrote: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.
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
907
|
Posted - 2015.12.04 23:00:35 -
[188] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Burtakus wrote: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.
The SP gap is a myth. If you train a ship to mastery 5, and you are facing an opponent with similar ship, then you are both on an equal footing barring how you fit, how you fly, drugs, implants, and possible OBG.
The OBG can be mitigated by making sure there are none on dscan. |
Dani Maulerant
Order of the Valkyrie LOADED-DICE
38
|
Posted - 2015.12.04 23:04:52 -
[189] - Quote
greg01 wrote:
...
Nevertheless, when/if CCP decide to remove OGB's. Will they kindly reimburse everyone (including myself)...
Very first thing wrong here. Nope you will not be reimbursed for it. The character is still usable by definition. They have not removed the skills, so therefore no SP or ISK reimbursement.
Quote:...all the time,isk and skill points that we put into the game training up an alt (millions of alts in Crosi's case)
Wait for it...
Quote:just so we could solo pvp better?
I died
|
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
39
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 01:48:18 -
[190] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:As i have said before, new players die to almost everyone, boosts or not. Boosts have very little impact on player retention. .
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.
Crosi Wesdo wrote: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.
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. |
|
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
39
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 01:50:06 -
[191] - Quote
This movement needs a slogan.
How about:
"Don't get an Alt with boosts. Get a friend instead!"
Or maybe:
"Friends are great: try one!" |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1622
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 02:07:00 -
[192] - Quote
Pestilen Ratte wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:As i have said before, new players die to almost everyone, boosts or not. Boosts have very little impact on player retention. . 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.
That is a horrible argument. I said boosts have very little effect on the new player retention. Blatant cherry picking does not an argument make.
A large portion of hte anti-booster advocates will cite low player retention as a consequence of boosters, there is only very slight anecdotal evidence for this while there is massive evidence that the new player experience is hostile to people grasping the basics of the game. What good is a tutorial on how to shoot rats if the overview itself is giving you all the wrong information about other players?
Pestilen Ratte wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote: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. 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.
My booster, in the past, has supported fleets of nearly 250 people. Last weekend it probably supported somewhere in the region of 350 people at one time of another.
I think a fundamental lack of understanding of the mechanics involved and an obsessive focus on 1v1 balance really clouds peoples perspective of boosts place in pvp.
As for them being alts, so many things in eve need alts. As i have said before, my zero SP characters with eyes on hostile stations probably saved me as much as my boosts. My low SP cyno chars have saved my like a good number of times.
If your argument is against alts and not boosts, then you have a long way to go to fix what most people dont see as a problem. |
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
39
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 02:19:26 -
[193] - Quote
I have to disagree that off grid boosts do not discourage new players. Our corp very nearly didn't bother coming back to Eve once we learned about them, and understood why some fights appeared to be someone hacking into the game engine and turning on an invincibility mod.
Even now, we invest too much time trying to find decent fights.
As for your other comments about alts, well that is all fair enough. I am not asking for space to be taken away from the mega blobs and how folks do their business in null sec.
All I am asking for is for space to be made for small gang PVP so that small corps can introduce folks to the game without it being an out and out scam for money by CCP.
No player should be able to turn on an invincibility mod by paying double fees each month.
That is the bottom line issue right here.
It brings the ethics of the subscription model into question, if a player can win simply by paying more.
Seriously, what kind of corrupt game is that? |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1622
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 02:21:34 -
[194] - Quote
Again, you lack any perceivable understanding of the mechanics. Boosts are not god mode. And you anecdote about nearly not coming back to eve seems very, odorous.
And i can fix your subscription model argument that telling you that my alt is just a friend. This is no more or less odorous than your silly anecdote.
We all happy now? |
Yuri Antollare
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
125
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 02:37:44 -
[195] - Quote
Andre Vauban wrote: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.
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.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1622
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 02:48:25 -
[196] - Quote
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 in t3 dessy fleets 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 are just going to be an utter mess when combined together in anything but small scale fights. |
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
39
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 02:50:27 -
[197] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote: And i can fix your subscription model argument by telling you that my alt is just a friend.
Your Alt is not your friend.
Your alt is YOU.
And YOU are paying money to switch on god mod.
Again, this is not your friend. It is all you.
CCP are exploiting your lack of friends and debasing their own ethical fabric in the process.
The whole thing make me need to go and lie down. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1622
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 02:52:58 -
[198] - Quote
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. |
Silverbackyererse
The Church of Awesome
178
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 02:53:49 -
[199] - Quote
Yuri Antollare wrote:
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.
I hope you are right and I hope there are enough people still around to enjoy a more dynamic battlefield if one does eventuate.
Off grid links have been around for so long in one form or another that they are ingrained in a lot of players psyche. Gonna be like giving up smoking after 30 hard years sucking on the cancer sticks. |
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
39
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 03:01:37 -
[200] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote: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.
But you have complete control over your friend, and you never let him on grid to enjoy the pew.
Your friend is denied, by YOU, of his chance to be forged in the fiery crucible.
That isn't a friend, its a gimp.
Jesus, now I have to go lie down again. |
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1622
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 03:03:00 -
[201] - Quote
Hes a consciousness objector. Like all pacifists though, he is required to pay his tax. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
768
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 09:35:59 -
[202] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote: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.
Skirmish gangs don't require links unless you're terrible.
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
768
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 09:44:25 -
[203] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote: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.
If a 25-35% buff to speed, targeting range, sig radius reduction, tackle range, EHP and sensor strength isn't pretty close to god mode I don't know what is. Compared to every other means of increasing stats whether it be drugs, implants, faction modules, fully trained skills...the advantage gained from boosts is absolutely nuts.
When I see your "friend" flying around fighting while you are at work or sleeping I'll take you seriously. You pay CCP extra money to make your space pixels better. At least have the intellectual honesty to admit that.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. The goal is players in space, not ships in space. 50 humans facing off is far more interesting than 2 players controlling 25 ships each. EVE is allegedly an MMO. It is not an RTS.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1622
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 10:12:00 -
[204] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote: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. Skirmish gangs don't require links unless you're terrible.
This highlings your bias. It entirely dep[ends on what you are fighting.
And a 30% boost is god mode? How can you prove your own notion incorrect in a single paragraph and not notice? |
Markus Lionum
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 11:10:07 -
[205] - Quote
Get over it link boy. You will have to learn to pvp properly or go mission it out in high sec |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1622
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 11:19:00 -
[206] - Quote
Markus Lionum wrote:Get over it link boy. You will have to learn to pvp properly or go mission it out in high sec
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. |
Andre Vauban
Aideron Robotics
443
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 15:05:10 -
[207] - Quote
Yuri Antollare wrote:Andre Vauban wrote: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. 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.
Sigh, but this "strategy" is exactly my point. The more powerful side will have the ability to counter all these strategies and kill the weaker sides links. This will in turn make them even stronger. This is the opposite of asymmetrical warfare that CCP needs to get back to (ie see logi nerfs so the losing side can actually kill something before losing their entire fleet). This is why I'm a fan of taking the strategy of either let the little guy use links like the big guys or just delete them all together. Link strategies that favor only the more powerful guy using links are flawed.
The argument everybody has is "It's not fair to the little guy (ie solo pvper w/o links) to fight the big guy (ie solo pvper w/ links)". This is valid, however the solution is not to change it so the little guy has a HARDER time getting links themselves. The solution is to make it easier for the little guy to even the field. On grid links make it harder for the little guy. Deleting links entirely from the game make it easier for the little guy.
.
|
Markus Lionum
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 21:07:32 -
[208] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Markus Lionum wrote:Get over it link boy. You will have to learn to pvp properly or go mission it out in high sec 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.
Your tears are sweet. But you will man up and blob in return so is all good
You sir are more risk adverse than a fresh starting pvp'er that pays for his ships / account with his RL food money, should stop preaching to people about what pvp is about |
Samwise Everquest
Run and Gun Mercenary Corps FETID
198
|
Posted - 2015.12.05 21:55:04 -
[209] - Quote
I love watching these beta males cry about their precious ogb :)
Run and Gun Mercenary Corps looking for work. Pras Phil.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1622
|
Posted - 2015.12.06 01:24:29 -
[210] - Quote
Samwise Everquest wrote:I love watching these beta males cry about their precious ogb :)
As i and others have said many times. Putting boosts on grid is a mistake. Deleting boosts is a far better alternative to putting them on grid. Short of an unannounced and extensive rebalance of all related modules most boots apart from damnation (and even then) are just not that good on grid in many scenarios.
In trying to make a more dynamic arena, you end up with both fleets hoping their first shot will cripple the hostile fleet. Whoever loses their single boost ship looses the entire fight, at least on paper. |
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
768
|
Posted - 2015.12.06 23:34:30 -
[211] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Burtakus wrote: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. The SP gap is a myth. If you train a ship to mastery 5, and you are facing an opponent with similar ship, then you are both on an equal footing barring how you fit, how you fly, drugs, implants, and possible OBG. The OBG can be mitigated by making sure there are none on dscan.
It takes several months to reach an acceptable skill level for a single frigate, assuming this "new player" has a perfectly focused skill plan and a "friend" feeding him ISK. I have been playing for two years now and I still don't have every frigate relevant skill maxed because, SHOCKER, as a first time player on my first character there were/are other things I need to train in order to participate more fully in the game.
Bittervets with multiple high SP accounts seem to forget what it was like to start with nothing. Especially in a 10 year old game against people who've been training multiple characters for the duration.
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
768
|
Posted - 2015.12.06 23:50:10 -
[212] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote: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. Skirmish gangs don't require links unless you're terrible. This highligts your bias. It entirely depends on what you are fighting. Nano engagement envelope shrinks quite significantly without links so a blanket statement like this shows you have no interest in a conersation. And a 30% boost is god mode? How can you prove your own notion incorrect in a single paragraph and not notice? And sure, if my friend just needs to fly alone to resolve one of the main (but purile) argument, that can be arranged lol.
As I said, when your friend flies alone while you're sleeping I'll take note.
A 30% boost to most of the critical stats on your ship is pretty close to god mode, yes. It's like you think I don't actually live in the FW zone and see this **** on a daily basis. Nano kiting should require skill. It should not be a case of "I have links they don't" as you engage and tackle from 60k doing 11k in a frigate or 6k in a cruiser. You shouldn't be able to stay on field against everything. Paying a second sub should not be the turning point between having to exercise skill and discretion in target selection and piloting, and just being able to remain ongrid and permanently harass the enemy because they don't have links. It is absolutely nuts that CCP let it get to the point where the possession of links was the deciding factor in a major portion of PvP encounters and I am grateful that they are finally doing something about it.
If you cannot kite with a 54k point / 60k engagement range in a frigate doing 7k m/s cold, perhaps you should take up ice mining in highsec. You are not entitled to be a solo god because you pay CCP more money than someone else.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1623
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 00:04:31 -
[213] - Quote
How do you know if im sleeping? That seems an awfully intrusive standard to base game balance of a game on.
Any proviso in a discussion about game balance that has 'Your friend must play while you are sleeping' in it, is already so convoluted and unwieldy as to be hilariously broken.
Personally, it doesnt matter to me if someone has alts. I tend to not fixate on individual players game choices. I just see the pixels in space and deal with them the best i can.
And a 30% boost is actually just a 30% boost. God mode is something much different. If you want to use extreme terms to express how upset boosts make you then feel free. But it doesnt help your case.
Boosts are very powerful if used correctly. They can also be, meaningless when used with no thought. They can also be expensive losses if used carelessly or without attention.
Luckily, i have a friend who flies off grid links for me so some of your major arguments are mute in my case. |
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome
1508
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 00:34:55 -
[214] - Quote
Andre Vauban wrote: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.
^^
This is spot on.
https://soundcloud.com/ibanezlaney
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
768
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 04:20:40 -
[215] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:How do you know if im sleeping? That seems an awfully intrusive standard to balance a game with.
Any proviso in a discussion about game balance that has 'Your friend must play while you are sleeping' in it, is already so convoluted and unwieldy as to be hilariously broken.
Personally, it doesnt matter to me if someone has alts. I tend to not fixate on individual players game choices. I just see the pixels in space and deal with them the best i can.
And a 30% boost is actually just a 30% boost. God mode is something much different. If you want to use extreme rhetoric to inflate the problem and express how upset boosts make you, then feel free. But it doesnt help your case.
Boosts are very powerful if used correctly. They can also be meaningless when used with no thought. They can also be expensive losses if used carelessly or without attention.
Luckily, i have a friend who flies off grid links for me so some of your major arguments are mute in my case.
Why do you keep repeating something we all know is untrue? If it was actually another human being controlling your links I would not have a problem with it. But we all know that is not the case. It's a self-evident fact that OGB functions are performed by semi-AFK alts.
Anything in the game can be ineffective if used improperly. For discussing matters of balance and risk/reward we prefer to look at how a mechanic impacts gameplay when utilized in conjunction with an above-room-temperature IQ.
|
Markus Lionum
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 05:03:50 -
[216] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Luckily, i have a friend who flies off grid links for me so some of your major arguments are mute in my case.
Bullshit lol |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1624
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 05:15:14 -
[217] - Quote
Prove me wrong. Seems like a large part of the anti-ogb argument revolves around paranoia and distrust :p |
Markus Lionum
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 05:32:13 -
[218] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Prove me wrong. Seems like a large part of the anti-ogb argument revolves around paranoia and distrust :p
yeah I got it you were trolling all along, the tears are still salty and well preserved tho |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1624
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 05:33:53 -
[219] - Quote
Pointing out the absurdity in an argument isnt actually trolling. |
Markus Lionum
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 05:40:20 -
[220] - Quote
500mn officer t3 with 3xlinks will be possible for under 1,5b I dont see the big problem about links.
What you are complaining about are specific details, crashing plexes with your t1 faction/pirate frigate wich is ghei since its frigate pvp, but calling it ghei its just my oppinion and maybe another 90% of people involved in that kind of pvp |
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1624
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 05:46:54 -
[221] - Quote
And i think flying around in anti frigate faction cruisers complaining about getting blobbed by frigates all day is lame.
In faction war you dont always get the choice where you engage war targets or what they are flying. You also dont get the choice to always enter a plex first.
See a gang in a plex and you dont have an evenly capable gang? Well, write it off, no combat for either side. You enter a different plex and they dont fancy risking a brawl at the warp in? Thats 2 plexes with no combat.
This happens anyway. But boosts certainly offer different options to deal with this common scenario. |
Markus Lionum
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 06:08:39 -
[222] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
See a gang in a plex and you dont have an evenly capable gang? Well, write it off, no combat for either side. You enter a different plex and they dont fancy risking a brawl at the warp in? Thats 2 plexes with no combat.
If you think links on grid will translate into less fights you are way off, on the contrary
its not the perfect change, imo perfect would be limiting warfare module on every ship at max 1 along with putting them on grid with increasing boost % depending on the hullor taking them out the game for good
this announced change forces linkers to be more tactical with the fit and possitioning, putting (a little) more risk than before on their boat, while totally screwing over the honest hard working l33t plex crashing frigate pilots. Also similar to other games it gives the advantage of those on the higher ground over those trying to capture the hill - wich makes total sense |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1624
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 06:23:54 -
[223] - Quote
So you reject my points with baseless assertions then back up my points with a reference to high ground advantage?
Most people who use boosts already have extremely tactical fits, the changes will just reduce engagement envelopes for a great number of people. Suggesting that it will not have a cooling effect on PVP when the effect is narrower envelopes is quite obtuse.
Gangs that dont have boosts will still not have boosts, but gangs generally engage smaller numbers regardless. Im just pointing out those people willing to engage gangs in smaller numbers will thin out a little.
Finally, seems you are angry about plex crashing frigates, if you are happy that this change will be a fix to that edge case while any other benefit is subjective or baseless then i have to question if your perspective is of any value at all and not just bitterness? |
Markus Lionum
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 06:32:26 -
[224] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:So you reject my points with baseless assertions then back up my points with a reference to high ground advantage?
Most people who use boosts already have extremely tactical fits, the changes will just reduce engagement envelopes for a great number of people. Suggesting that it will not have a cooling effect on PVP when the effect is narrower envelopes is quite obtuse.
Gangs that dont have boosts will still not have boosts, but gangs generally engage smaller numbers regardless. Im just pointing out those people willing to engage gangs in smaller numbers will thin out a little.
Finally, seems you are angry about plex crashing frigates, if you are happy that this change will be a fix to that edge case while any other benefit is subjective or baseless then i have to question if your perspective is of any value at all and not just bitterness?
its not that im specifically angry about frigates crashing plexes, but you are the only zealot here defending links as they are and your reason is purely because it will affect your frigate plex crashing. anything else you mention is bullshit.
Then you use ambigous and abstract wording to dilute that bs
And you bet im bitter - I've been bitter about links for years |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1624
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 07:18:58 -
[225] - Quote
Markus Lionum wrote:its not that im specifically angry about frigates crashing plexes, but you are the only zealot here defending links as they are and your reason is purely because it will affect your frigate plex crashing.
It will also effect;
-Small/medium gangs fighting alpha fleets and/or out numbered.
-Competent kite fleets being outside recon web influence making them quite immune to armour brawlers.
-Get past 30 people per side and the subcap logi game is pretty much over without links on many hulls.
-Flying logistics with extended cycle times and reduced reps. Without links armour logi will just melt to surprisingly small gangs and their reps will be surprisingly ineffective specially on t1 hulls. Shield logi is already flimsy in many cases, no links will make them iffy at the best of times.
-System pushes where the use of links allows otherwise weak doctrines to shine assuming skilled use.
-And just about every other facet of organised small/med/large gang pvp.
All of which i participate in on a regular basis which the exception of large scale which thankfully is a rarity.
Now, is this all a bad thing? i dont know. I would just suggest that the people who are playing the game at the moment are mostly satisfied with how the game plays exemplified by them playing. With the exception of a few sperglords on these forums who hardly ever pvp anyway. In order to satisfy these sperglords you are inflicting a substantial change in gameplay on many people who actually do pvp.
Seems a bit risky to me.
You might say this will result in much more things dying. I would pose that it will result in more blobbing up, perhaps more logi and people being far more selective in the fights they take, and for good reason. |
Arla Sarain
712
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 12:43:45 -
[226] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:people being far more selective in the fights they take, and for good reason. With countless people -orange and -red on peoples' lists for the reasons this entire thread is based on, you wouldn't think that's the bloody point? |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1624
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 16:28:28 -
[227] - Quote
You clearly dont know what 'ultimatum' means.
Also, my point throughout this thread is that this will effect all other areas of pvp. You prove my point yet again by citing examples of how links are broken in 1v1 to justify changing the experience and capabilities of fleet players on ever scale everywhere else in EVE.
Now, one more time in case you missed it again. Im not suggesting that this is objectively bad for the game. Im saying that it is a risk to nerf fleets and in particular smaller fleets vs larger fleets since that is the content that the silent majority enjoys. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
914
|
Posted - 2015.12.07 16:44:20 -
[228] - Quote
Links coming on grid doesn't bother me so much. Since grid will be 7800km. Just set booster as a far away as possible with multiple grid bounces.
Command Destroyers and T2 logi frigates are going to make Small plexes a real pain.
If links are brought on grid, that means they will not be available in novice plexes; which means fights for those plexes will be either a battle of attrition, or a lot of blue-balling.
Oh, and with remote reppers getting falloff, the logi game is going to change significantly. |
Lucy Callagan
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
29
|
Posted - 2015.12.08 17:19:12 -
[229] - Quote
Markus Lionum wrote: but you are the only zealot here defending links
Oh he's not the only one, others are just to busy doing actual pvp or other stuff to be forum warrioring as efficiently as Crosi does.
Frugu.net
|
Xplecit
McKee Exports The Methodical Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2015.12.08 19:25:10 -
[230] - Quote
I honestly dont use link but i started training on my alt like 4month ago still cant use T2 link almost on skirmish, but can use the T3 shield booster and armor (legion/tengu). And this training is 1/6 of my total SP on my alt! Like no refound for a preson that started training leadership skills recently GG go next! - No remap of SP, a simple thing that would resolve all of this and so many other problems!
I believe command ships can have links and decent tank. But T3 CAN'T they simply can't!! I will answer your question why links are off-grind if you explain me how you want a T3 link to be in a fighting battle...
T3 cruiser link normally are unscanable have no tank, not even a damage control, for a reason, because they arent supposed to be a part of the real fight.
And people that use links for PVE? WH, incursion...
Did CCP just listen to FW carry babys... this remind me of WoW when a part of the comunity started whining did the change didnt think about it and **** it up even more!
Again i dont use Links i have fight agains links in defense of my alliance home system, and small ganks with links. Not being a fan of it doesn't mean i have to cry a river to CCP... Deal with.
I honestly think a SP REMAP(1 per year). is way WAY more important them all this link ****! A "leveling system" that doesnt involve skill knowledge, not even really playing the game .. just waiting for the clock "tic tac" For me it has logic if you training large projectile at lest fire the weapon, or if fire you learn faster.. This is the only game i know with a "training/leveling" whatever you want to call it that the only requirement is for you to pay! And i played UO-SWG and recent mmo even try out eve in the first 1-2 years when it come out.
So many **** up things in eve specially the training of the caracter that i CAN'T change the skill points! 2xT3 + link training GG ccp Go next!
|
|
Jhousetlin Zamayid
Attitude Adjustment Incorporated
31
|
Posted - 2015.12.08 20:32:14 -
[231] - Quote
Lotta debate in this thread.
Here is my opinion regarding ECM and OGB:
If the only solution is to "bring your own", then there's probably a balance problem. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1624
|
Posted - 2015.12.08 22:10:45 -
[232] - Quote
If your only solution is to bring your own, then you are ignoring a few other solutions. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
915
|
Posted - 2015.12.08 22:11:21 -
[233] - Quote
Jhousetlin Zamayid wrote:Lotta debate in this thread.
Here is my opinion regarding ECM and OGB:
If the only solution is to "bring your own", then there's probably a balance problem.
It's not a balance problem. Balance is between 2 people. 1 versus 1. OGBs are 2 versus 1. Unfortunately, the kill report doesn't show that accurately. |
Markus Lionum
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2015.12.08 22:26:59 -
[234] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:Jhousetlin Zamayid wrote:Lotta debate in this thread.
Here is my opinion regarding ECM and OGB:
If the only solution is to "bring your own", then there's probably a balance problem. It's not a balance problem. Balance is between 2 people. 1 versus 1. OGBs are 2 versus 1. Unfortunately, the kill report doesn't show that accurately.
Problem really is in how little input, focus and risk running links involves - call it balance or something else |
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
41
|
Posted - 2015.12.08 22:57:32 -
[235] - Quote
It is possibly worth stepping back and wondering how CCP see this issue.
I'm gonna speculate, because so far CCP are as silent as the grave on this thread.
It seems to me that CCP has two predominant cultures of strength: on one side you have the financial folks who are (reasonably) concerned for the bottom line, and who see any short term threat to subscriber income as death on a stick. These folks know that there are a lot of lone wolf players who have alts and who reasonably want value for money for their double subscription fees.
One the other side, you have the "visionaries" who think they are very big deals because they know moderately influential people in very large player corps. These people like to make economic arguments, but it always boils down to the same thing: we need to protect and pander to the old time big deals in the mega corps, because they ARE Eve. They built it, they pay huge subscriptions for large numbers of folks, etc etc.
Now, there are also the third group, who are the artists and engineers who just get on do their freaking jobs and work for a living, but nobody listens to them so we can also ignore them for the moment.
So, the big problem here is that both the dominant cultures in the CCP world pander to established income streams. Neither side is focused on new player retention, or building new market shares in new demographics. One side want to chase the lone wolf side of the game, the other want to chase the mega corp demographic.
For all we know, the world of interweb space ship players is basically divided into these two camps. CCP have the data, not me. So maybe it is possible that 99% of Eve players are lone wolf types who prefer gimps to friends, or they are office workers who play Eve because their meglomaniac boss uses company funds to subcribe their whole office into a mega corp in a mega alliance with other space lord bosses.
Let's not be naive. A lot of large corps are office based. A lot of revenue to CCP surely comes from office bosses who write subscriptions off as a cost of running the office. There is nothing wrong with that, except that it means that a lot of players in these corps are probably more likely to act like goons than RPG enthusiasts. Hello Nullsec!
If it is true that CCP is focused on the lone wolf (lone wolf sounds a lot better than "gimp pimp") and the office drone demographic, this would explain a lot about the game.
It would explain off grid boosters. It would explain hilariously OP ships. It would explain the neglect of small gang PVP in favour of citadels and Titans that NOBODY except the office bosses ever fly.
And that is a strategic decision that CCP is best placed to make. They know who plays the game, they know where the money comes from.
However, if it is true that CCP aspires to be greater than it already is, if it is true that CCP wants to retain the new players who are not gimp pimps or office drones, then CCP needs to stop focusing on mechanics that destroy small gang player experience, and they need to start building a culture within their own oprganization that speaks for the demographic they wish to engage in the market place.
Since we are building a lexicon here, let's call them "normal, eager roleplayers with friends", or NERFS.
We have the gimp pimps. We have the office lords and their drones.
What about the NERFS?
Who is going to speak for the NERFS?
Because we are the future.
I hope. I mean, jesus christ. Gimp pimps and office drones?
I need to lie down again. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
772
|
Posted - 2015.12.09 00:05:42 -
[236] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:If your only solution is to bring your own, then you are ignoring a few other solutions.
The other "counters" to links require greater input and skill on the part of the player. They aren't afk-able, and actually killing the links ship requires more than 1 additional account. So yes, the most efficient solution by far is to bring your own, rather than dedicating multiple players/accounts towards hunting them which usually just results in the link abuser running away.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1624
|
Posted - 2015.12.09 03:02:23 -
[237] - Quote
If boosting is as passive as you say, all you have to do is 60 seconds of probing, and get a decent kill. Or 15 seconds of warping to a gate with a tornado.
Ironically, if boosts are not afk they can be easier to deal with. SImply ejecting a set of 8 combats can be enough to make boosters think twice about what they are doing.
Anyway, im not sure where in the rules that it states that rewards should be balanced by stats AND effort. That throws a spanner in so many aspects of the game.
Your argument suggests that you are simply defeated before you even start. Everythng is too unfair, or too much effort lol. |
Xplecit
McKee Exports The Methodical Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2015.12.09 07:20:03 -
[238] - Quote
I wonder why noone complains about the racials bonus of titans.. And only small pvp group and FW stuff!
Because old players dont whine like this new players that do FW and want to solo PVP. Simple has that! Yeah i dont like link either.. but deal with it!
Maybe giving link only to T2 cruiser or higher would be the best idea. That way no links for a 50mil ship being boosted by a 1b ship!
And the logic of bringing a T3 link on grid, with no weapons no tank just link! Really amazes me by the negative...
Like you forcing a non-combat ship to the grid, hopping for a juice kill mail! Say it all! Same skill level of ganking mining bardes and indis! You ask for a fair fight... What is fair in fighting a ship with no guns no tank!
Just remove link for small size hauls. And from T1 medium hauls! For me it's perfectly clear that CCP didn't think of the role of a T3 boosting. Most of big fleet compus that use link use it already on grid with command ships! If they used off-grid link im 99% sure CCP wouldn't do a think because thoose are the real dollars! Not small FW crying babies!
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
773
|
Posted - 2015.12.09 08:32:47 -
[239] - Quote
Xplecit wrote:I wonder why noone complains about the racials bonus of titans.. And only small pvp group and FW stuff!
Because old players dont whine like this new players that do FW and want to solo PVP. Simple has that! Yeah i dont like link either.. but deal with it!
Maybe giving link only to T2 cruiser or higher would be the best idea. That way no links for a 50mil ship being boosted by a 1b ship!
And the logic of bringing a T3 link on grid, with no weapons no tank just link! Really amazes me by the negative...
Like you forcing a non-combat ship to the grid, hopping for a juice kill mail! Say it all! Same skill level of ganking mining bardes and indis! You ask for a fair fight... What is fair in fighting a ship with no guns no tank!
Just remove link for small size hauls. And from T1 medium hauls! For me it's perfectly clear that CCP didn't think of the role of a T3 boosting. Most of big fleet compus that use link use it already on grid with command ships! If they used off-grid link im 99% sure CCP wouldn't do a think because thoose are the real dollars! Not small FW crying babies!
Not to meantion that most people that pvp in low sec, and do FW don't pvp in Null because "they dont like bubbles"... all said!
You know why I PvP in lowsec instead of null?
I get to press F1 in both, but in low I get to press other buttons too.
|
Xplecit
McKee Exports The Methodical Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2015.12.09 09:47:41 -
[240] - Quote
Most time i run logy so have more them the F1 to play arround. But i'm geting what you saying...
But why every dam "balance" = a NERF. Ishtars, drone are good exemples. Cap changes incoming in spring not a "re-balance" JUST A PURE SIMPLE NERF!
Problem aren't the off-grid booster. Problem is when you use a +1b ship to boost a T1 ship, making stronger them pirates ships or T2 ships,or a already OP tactical destroyer that becomes a bit absurd with links!
This is the problem not off-grid links!
How the only way CCP see in "re-balance" is nerfing link the the ground specially the T3 cruiser forcing them to be on grid. Not thinking of PVE like incursion and WH or LvL5 and just tunel vision of nul sec pvp and FW... it's just pure genius (irony at his max)
CCP in the rest years "re-balance" = nerfing. we had with ishtar and drones.. "invested a new type ship that deal with drones and missiels also. Like we have neuts disruptions or turrets, dumpners... why not give us another card to play with on the battle field! Inset nerf to the ground.
Cap changes incoming... dreads in siege with new capital sub-cap weapons doing 2k dps while you can eWar them.. what dps will do titan with this new weapons since they dont have siege! Rookie ship dps on guns, for a titan NICE!!
Inset of really re-balancing supers. They are going to nerf them to the ground.
I must ask do the people that come with this "re-balance" ideas and get payed for them, do even play the game, really play!
|
|
Burtakus
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
41
|
Posted - 2015.12.09 14:58:56 -
[241] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:If your only solution is to bring your own, then you are ignoring a few other solutions. The other "counters" to links require greater input and skill on the part of the player. They aren't afk-able, and actually killing the links ship requires more than 1 additional account. So yes, the most efficient solution by far is to bring your own, rather than dedicating multiple players/accounts towards hunting them which usually just results in the link abuser running away.
Honestly you are whining more than just about anyone I know. If you are willing to back up that whine I have a proposal.
Ten arranged 1 v 1 fights between you and me. You pick the hull classes you want to fight with. I will place 1 billion isk on it that I win 7 or more of our fights.
My only ground rules are: 1) no links and we must be in in the same fleet with just us two 2) we use a Gall Mill controlled station system so you can reship 3) T2 and meta fittings only...no faction, ded, or officer 4) no implants because I will pod you 5) BS hulls and down 6) we each must front the 1 billion to be held by a 3rd party before the first fight begins 7) spectators welcome as long as they don't interfere....interference means the fight is voided and does not count toward the 10
What say you?
Burt |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
915
|
Posted - 2015.12.09 15:07:51 -
[242] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:If your only solution is to bring your own, then you are ignoring a few other solutions. The other "counters" to links require greater input and skill on the part of the player. They aren't afk-able, and actually killing the links ship requires more than 1 additional account. So yes, the most efficient solution by far is to bring your own, rather than dedicating multiple players/accounts towards hunting them which usually just results in the link abuser running away.
I believe Thantos Marathon kind of proved that hunting links is actually not that hard.
See: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=454826&p=3 |
Thanatos Marathon
Black Fox Marauders
589
|
Posted - 2015.12.09 15:13:01 -
[243] - Quote
So you are saying killing all those boosters was easy!?
Black Fox Marauders is Recruiting
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
915
|
Posted - 2015.12.09 15:23:43 -
[244] - Quote
Thanatos Marathon wrote:So you are saying killing all those boosters was easy!?
With good planning and lots of alpha. Sure. |
Squatdog
State Protectorate Caldari State
200
|
Posted - 2015.12.10 01:40:38 -
[245] - Quote
Burtakus wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:If your only solution is to bring your own, then you are ignoring a few other solutions. The other "counters" to links require greater input and skill on the part of the player. They aren't afk-able, and actually killing the links ship requires more than 1 additional account. So yes, the most efficient solution by far is to bring your own, rather than dedicating multiple players/accounts towards hunting them which usually just results in the link abuser running away. Honestly you are whining more than just about anyone I know. If you are willing to back up that whine I have a proposal. Ten arranged 1 v 1 fights between you and me. You pick the hull classes you want to fight with. I will place 1 billion isk on it that I win 7 or more of our fights. My only ground rules are: 1) no links and we must be in in the same fleet with just us two 2) we use a Gall Mill controlled station system so you can reship 3) T2 and meta fittings only...no faction, ded, or officer 4) no implants because I will pod you 5) BS hulls and down 6) we each must front the 1 billion to be held by a 3rd party before the first fight begins 7) spectators welcome as long as they don't interfere....interference means the fight is voided and does not count toward the 10 What say you? Burt
Will never happen.
Crosi Wesdo is one of the worst players in Eve and literally can't fight without links and a 4.2b pod.
If you're lucky, he might give you his stuff when OGB is removed.
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
773
|
Posted - 2015.12.10 01:52:14 -
[246] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:Thanatos Marathon wrote:So you are saying killing all those boosters was easy!? With good planning and lots of alpha. Sure.
As I said, requires more than one nado alt so you're looking at mismatched numbers already. Purely for purposes of countering links, the best solution is to bring your own. This represents a poor mechanic.
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
773
|
Posted - 2015.12.10 01:57:18 -
[247] - Quote
Burtakus wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:If your only solution is to bring your own, then you are ignoring a few other solutions. The other "counters" to links require greater input and skill on the part of the player. They aren't afk-able, and actually killing the links ship requires more than 1 additional account. So yes, the most efficient solution by far is to bring your own, rather than dedicating multiple players/accounts towards hunting them which usually just results in the link abuser running away. Honestly you are whining more than just about anyone I know. If you are willing to back up that whine I have a proposal. Ten arranged 1 v 1 fights between you and me. You pick the hull classes you want to fight with. I will place 1 billion isk on it that I win 7 or more of our fights. My only ground rules are: 1) no links and we must be in in the same fleet with just us two 2) we use a Gall Mill controlled station system so you can reship 3) T2 and meta fittings only...no faction, ded, or officer 4) no implants because I will pod you 5) BS hulls and down 6) we each must front the 1 billion to be held by a 3rd party before the first fight begins 7) spectators welcome as long as they don't interfere....interference means the fight is voided and does not count toward the 10 What say you? Burt
I'll take your challenge. I'm not putting a billion ISK on it. If you want to prove something you can take it or leave it.
Our relative skill at PvP has nothing to do with the fact that OGB is broken as all hell. It's the most egregious form of pay to win in the game and it's high time it was done away with.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1624
|
Posted - 2015.12.10 02:12:40 -
[248] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Estella Osoka wrote:Thanatos Marathon wrote:So you are saying killing all those boosters was easy!? With good planning and lots of alpha. Sure. As I said, requires more than one nado alt so you're looking at mismatched numbers already. Purely for purposes of countering links, the best solution is to bring your own. This represents a poor mechanic.
Links dont counter links in many scenarios.
If spending 60 seconds of probing and hitting F1 once is too much effort for you, then i cant imagine you will ever be happy in eve. |
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome
1508
|
Posted - 2015.12.10 02:32:23 -
[249] - Quote
Burtakus wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:If your only solution is to bring your own, then you are ignoring a few other solutions. The other "counters" to links require greater input and skill on the part of the player. They aren't afk-able, and actually killing the links ship requires more than 1 additional account. So yes, the most efficient solution by far is to bring your own, rather than dedicating multiple players/accounts towards hunting them which usually just results in the link abuser running away. Honestly you are whining more than just about anyone I know. If you are willing to back up that whine I have a proposal. Ten arranged 1 v 1 fights between you and me. You pick the hull classes you want to fight with. I will place 1 billion isk on it that I win 7 or more of our fights. My only ground rules are: 1) no links and we must be in in the same fleet with just us two 2) we use a Gall Mill controlled station system so you can reship 3) T2 and meta fittings only...no faction, ded, or officer 4) no implants because I will pod you 5) BS hulls and down 6) we each must front the 1 billion to be held by a 3rd party before the first fight begins 7) spectators welcome as long as they don't interfere....interference means the fight is voided and does not count toward the 10 What say you? Burt
I am happy to be the trusted 3rd party to hold the 1Bil from each of you.
https://soundcloud.com/ibanezlaney
|
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome
1508
|
Posted - 2015.12.10 02:51:54 -
[250] - Quote
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.
https://soundcloud.com/ibanezlaney
|
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1624
|
Posted - 2015.12.10 11:35:12 -
[251] - Quote
Ah, but at least he knows you have two toons so he can blue ball you. Therefor more content?
I think thats the logic. |
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade
248
|
Posted - 2015.12.10 17:12:22 -
[252] - 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"
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
921
|
Posted - 2015.12.10 17:28:02 -
[253] - Quote
Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote: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).
What was really sad is that if they had just parked a Command Ship on the undock, they would have gotten a better return. Command ships can do the same role and still have tank. Start taking a hit, dock up.
Links on grid will be cool. Especially since grid is now 8000km. Still gonna need those probers.
What is the distance from the plex acc gate to the beacon? about 10,000km? |
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome
1511
|
Posted - 2015.12.10 21:14:49 -
[254] - Quote
Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote: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).
A Fleet of 251 has another fully skilled booster/leadership toon in it. There is no advantage at all at that scale.
https://soundcloud.com/ibanezlaney
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
774
|
Posted - 2015.12.11 03:44:14 -
[255] - 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.
The advantage links provide to kiting setups is far more valuable than just bringing +1 character on-grid which will require far more active input than a links alt.
Crosi brings links instead of a logi alt because the logi alt doesn't enable him to remain on-grid indefinitely against an enemy fleet. Nor would a Falcon alt or anything else. Links are the critical cornerstone of the presently supreme nano kite meta and their risk/reward considerations are vastly out of sync with any other conceivable alt roles.
Which is the crux of the matter. The nano kite elite pvp gods don't want to see their playstyle get nerfed, which is understandable. But the fact that this play style is more a function of paying a second sub than any combination of player skill and decision-making should raise red flags for any honest observer.
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
774
|
Posted - 2015.12.11 03:46:23 -
[256] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote: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). What was really sad is that if they had just parked a Command Ship on the undock, they would have gotten a better return. Command ships can do the same role and still have tank. Start taking a hit, dock up. Links on grid will be cool. Especially since grid is now 8000km. Still gonna need those probers. What is the distance from the plex acc gate to the beacon? about 10,000km?
CC's don't have the risk free mobility though. Of they get caught on a gate by a fleet they're dead. It still takes *I believe* a minimum of three fully skilled nados to alpha a single LSE booster T3.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1628
|
Posted - 2015.12.11 08:32:39 -
[257] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote: The advantage links provide to kiting setups is far more valuable than just bringing +1 character on-grid which will require far more active input than a links alt.
Crosi brings links instead of a logi alt because the logi alt doesn't enable him to remain on-grid indefinitely against an enemy fleet. Nor would a Falcon alt or anything else. Links are the critical cornerstone of the presently supreme nano kite meta and their risk/reward considerations are vastly out of sync with any other conceivable alt roles.
Which is the crux of the matter. The nano kite elite pvp gods don't want to see their playstyle get nerfed, which is understandable. But the fact that this play style is more a function of paying a second sub than any combination of player skill and decision-making should raise red flags for any honest observer.
So because with links i can harass an ill prepared enemy fleet but at the same time be nothing more than a nuisance to an enemy fleet that has advisable counters in place, that means links are broken?
Seems like the anti link argument is evolving. Its starting point was 'links are god mode and break the game on every level' and ends up with 'i hate crosi and if i have to hear another story of him forcing brave newbies out of a plex im gonna puke'. lol.
Im sure one day someone will give you the credit you deserve demiriwhatever your name is. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
926
|
Posted - 2015.12.11 15:32:09 -
[258] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Estella Osoka wrote:Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote: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). What was really sad is that if they had just parked a Command Ship on the undock, they would have gotten a better return. Command ships can do the same role and still have tank. Start taking a hit, dock up. Links on grid will be cool. Especially since grid is now 8000km. Still gonna need those probers. What is the distance from the plex acc gate to the beacon? about 10,000km? CC's don't have the risk free mobility though. Of they get caught on a gate by a fleet they're dead. It still takes *I believe* a minimum of three fully skilled nados to alpha a single LSE booster T3.
2 Nados is all that is required. Ever heard of MWD+cloak? Helps non-covert ops ships get around lowsec pretty well. |
Ragged Starkiller
Hoplite Brigade
10
|
Posted - 2015.12.11 18:13:26 -
[259] - Quote
I wish to share my point of view of command ships and links. I believe they are related!!!
Command ships SHOULD be more tanky. BS or faction BS tank like. very few dps. Mostly Ewar capabilities and LINKS. on grid.
They must be on grid to work. If command ships were really strong this would dis encourage alpha them or make them a least survive for 10 seconds, enough to make use of those links.
I believe that a rethinking of how command ships and links work is strongly related.
Cheers
PS: NERF off grid links!!! |
IbanezLaney
the church of awesome
1512
|
Posted - 2015.12.12 14:33:10 -
[260] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:. Brawling is for chumps.
I have been trying to tell people this for 3-4 years.
https://soundcloud.com/ibanezlaney
|
|
Shelick
Purged Society
2
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 05:21:58 -
[261] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:Bastion Arzi wrote: not everyone has links. links wont win u every fight. they give u an edge.
Daerrol wrote: My point is this: I am terrible at PVP. Like the worst. I can still make some kills though, what's your excuse?
Abannans Forum Alt wrote:chances are, the guy who killed you with links would've probably killed you without them too Posts like these are missing the point of why OGBs are so terrible. The stats you gain from an AFK T3 alt are insanely over powered for their price, this is well documented. You get advantages you can't get anywhere else in the game for such a cheap price. On top of those epic bonuses, the AFK T3 alt can also Cov Ops cloak, is very difficult to probe down, is interdiction nullified, and so is at very little risk itself. Plus, the idea of creating a second account, training it for six months (just a vague estimation, I don't care if I'm technically wrong; I think you can get the point), and then dragging this secret alt around with you everywhere you go for PvP, is just really lame gameplay, I mean come on, that is such garbage. Does anyone really feel good or have fun dragging a Loki around with their main everywhere they go so that they can be risk averse with a cloaky nullified scout that boosts them from a safe spot every time they decide they want to fight? Sorry but that is just plain stupid. I have an alt that just finished training for Loki, I used it a few times last month (I admit the actual PvP I did was pretty fun), but I've put it away and I'm going to sell the account (or the character, I'm not exactly sure how that works) based on principle. This type of gameplay is just too boring. It's boring, it's lame, it's any bad word you want to call it, but it's anything but interesting. Of course links are not the only thing that matters, or they won't win you every fight, and it's not impossible to beat someone who used links, but that's all beside the point; links are insanely OP, they're relatively inexpensive, there's almost no risk involved in using them, and the gameplay itself that they provide is just garbage. It's an AFK second account that sits in space and gives your ship steroids. Wow, so awesome. /s Links are cancer. They're the opposite of fun or interesting gameplay and they're completely imbalanced. That's all I have to say about that. It's the last post I'll make in this thread, I didn't want to post in here again because it's redundant but I couldn't sleep thinking about it :D Links are going to get fixed, you can be sure of that. There's no way around it, it's obvious how bad they are and a change is inevitable.
So just because you think this type of gameplay is boring, everybody else should sell their characters too and stop using offgrid boosts?
GTFO
|
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
1292
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 06:04:20 -
[262] - Quote
Quote:Links on grid will be cool. Especially since grid is now 8000km. Still gonna need those probers.
People really think they're just going to take the existing links and make them "on grid", huh?
It's almost certainly going to be a total rework and it is very, very doubtful that you are going to be sitting at the ass-end of a 7800km grid to boost. They specifically said AOE effects. Just look at Command Destroyers. Those were not designed for a future where the only thing a booster ship has to do is turn on their links and try to avoid dying, preferably by not actually being anywhere near the violence.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
355
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 09:32:03 -
[263] - Quote
I like my scram range active armor tanking. Without links, doing that against multiple opponents would be suicide every time.....rather than just suicide every other time.
With the way the game has changed the last few years, active armor tanking has taken a decidedly big nosedive in performance.
- Links were nerfed - ASBs were introduced which make armor much less attractive - Resist bonuses on hulls were nerfed - Armor rep amount bonuses went from 10% per level to 7.5% - The dps on practically everything got buffed
The last one is the big one. Weapon damage increased, fitting requirements were reduced, ships got increased fittings.......certain ships got application bonuses, some got drones or additional drones....some cruisers got an additional mid that's often another web for better application......we have new launchers specialized in burst dps....
Ships do more damage and apply it better than they did just a few years ago. At the same time the maximum dps that can be tanked has gone down.
A lot of people don't like links, but they make the impossible possible.
I'm a dirty rotten link user. I fight in scram range with a beefy armor tank, that's my style. I hide the links, and then sit a plex in a non-meta ship and wait for the meta tryhards to show up. I call it "fishing".
Waiting in a plex in a decloaked astero, killing the daredevil that comes in and his backup.........good times.
If a solo pilot comes in, and then no backup arrives I'M SHOCKED. It may not be a fair fight because of the links, but I'm usually in something they think they can take. If I had been in a worm or something, I probably wouldn't get as many customers because who on earth is going to go in on X badass ship that's already setup in the plex?
Over the years I've seen a lot of butthurt aimed in my direction. "you only won because of the links"
Yeah well I wouldn't have fought 3 thrashers in a vengeance without them. I wouldn't have fought a dramiel in a punisher. I wouldn't have fought 5 AFs in an astero. I wouldn't have fought a cynabal in a punisher.
I'd have warped out of the plex when I saw that coming my way and there would have been zero content for anybody. You can't fight outnumbered and outshipped like that in scram range......unless you have links. Solo against many, the only option would be kiting.
It's not fair that our gang couldn't kill the linked guy, boohoo. If this were a game where things like that weren't possible, where the only thing that matters is how many you brought and what they were in......it would be a much duller game. |
Fu Qjoo
Pangalactic Frontline Supply Agency
40
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 11:41:51 -
[264] - Quote
I will unsub all of my accounts when OGB are removed unless I find a new excuse for my losses that cannot be proven wrong. |
George Gouillot
Black Fox Marauders
90
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 11:52:20 -
[265] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Burtakus wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:If your only solution is to bring your own, then you are ignoring a few other solutions. The other "counters" to links require greater input and skill on the part of the player. They aren't afk-able, and actually killing the links ship requires more than 1 additional account. So yes, the most efficient solution by far is to bring your own, rather than dedicating multiple players/accounts towards hunting them which usually just results in the link abuser running away. Honestly you are whining more than just about anyone I know. If you are willing to back up that whine I have a proposal. Ten arranged 1 v 1 fights between you and me. You pick the hull classes you want to fight with. I will place 1 billion isk on it that I win 7 or more of our fights. My only ground rules are: 1) no links and we must be in in the same fleet with just us two 2) we use a Gall Mill controlled station system so you can reship 3) T2 and meta fittings only...no faction, ded, or officer 4) no implants because I will pod you 5) BS hulls and down 6) we each must front the 1 billion to be held by a 3rd party before the first fight begins 7) spectators welcome as long as they don't interfere....interference means the fight is voided and does not count toward the 10 What say you? Burt I'll take your challenge. I'm not putting a billion ISK on it. If you want to prove something you can take it or leave it. Our relative skill at PvP has nothing to do with the fact that OGB is broken as all hell. It's the most egregious form of pay to win in the game and it's high time it was done away with.
I will pay the 1 bln for you if you lose. You can keep the prize if you win. As its my ISK on the line, I will agree upon 3rd party with Burt.
Only thing I am asking is to be able to take part as a visitor. What say you?
|
Ragged Starkiller
Hoplite Brigade
10
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 12:59:43 -
[266] - Quote
IbanezLaney wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:. Brawling is for chumps. I have been trying to tell people this for 3-4 years.
LIES!!!, brawling is awesome!.
This is a dumb commentary that doesnt explain why its giving brawling a negative opinion. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1631
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 14:24:45 -
[267] - Quote
Because taking a brawl is like giving complete control to your target(s) in the hope that they dont just have another 20 people jump in the second scrams go on.
Theres a time and place for it, but results in a lot more reshipping. |
Thanatos Marathon
Black Fox Marauders
590
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 15:33:16 -
[268] - Quote
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.
Black Fox Marauders is Recruiting
|
Ragged Starkiller
Hoplite Brigade
10
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 16:24:29 -
[269] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Because taking a brawl is like giving complete control to your target(s) in the hope that they dont just have another 20 people jump in the second scrams go on.
Theres a time and place for it, but results in a lot more reshipping.
it has nothing to do with reshiping.
brawl combined with proper logistics cant be broken by range unless range has ewar but this can be also countered by anti ewar.
As everything in eve, this is situational, specialy for pvp.
if u consider complexes from Faction warfare, if a cruiser size fleet get into a medium complx and waits at entry point for a kite fleet, they will always win.... This scenario works also for gates in null (with/without bubbles).
so again, its situational.
kite and brawl are both good styles. |
Oreb Wing
Black Fox Marauders
124
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 19:43:25 -
[270] - 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.
Also, I've seen that the drop is crucially timed to probe and pounce as the engagement begins, when a pilots attention is at its most vulnerable to distraction. Do not completely reduce the difficulty it is to catch some links to dumb luck or lack of attention.
There is no grey area when the light of reason directs wisdom.
|
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1631
|
Posted - 2015.12.14 20:28:12 -
[271] - Quote
Ragged Starkiller wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:Because taking a brawl is like giving complete control to your target(s) in the hope that they dont just have another 20 people jump in the second scrams go on.
Theres a time and place for it, but results in a lot more reshipping. it has nothing to do with reshiping. brawl combined with proper logistics cant be broken by range unless range has ewar but this can be also countered by anti ewar. As everything in eve, this is situational, specialy for pvp. if u consider complexes from Faction warfare, if a cruiser size fleet get into a medium complx and waits at entry point for a kite fleet, they will always win.... This scenario works also for gates in null (with/without bubbles). so again, its situational. kite and brawl are both good styles.
I have no problems brawling in fleets, with logistics. even less so. My comment was about solo/micro gank. |
Squatdog
State Protectorate Caldari State
200
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 00:02:26 -
[272] - Quote
DELICIOUS TEARS.
|
Fu Qjoo
Pangalactic Frontline Supply Agency
41
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 11:30:04 -
[273] - Quote
Squatdog wrote:DELICIOUS TEARS.
We can't see them, can you please take off your googles? |
Squatdog
State Protectorate Caldari State
200
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 13:33:24 -
[274] - Quote
Fu Qjoo wrote:Squatdog wrote:DELICIOUS TEARS.
We can't see them, can you please take off your googles?
Post on your main.
|
Ragged Starkiller
Hoplite Brigade
10
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 13:40:16 -
[275] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Ragged Starkiller wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:Because taking a brawl is like giving complete control to your target(s) in the hope that they dont just have another 20 people jump in the second scrams go on.
Theres a time and place for it, but results in a lot more reshipping. it has nothing to do with reshiping. brawl combined with proper logistics cant be broken by range unless range has ewar but this can be also countered by anti ewar. As everything in eve, this is situational, specialy for pvp. if u consider complexes from Faction warfare, if a cruiser size fleet get into a medium complx and waits at entry point for a kite fleet, they will always win.... This scenario works also for gates in null (with/without bubbles). so again, its situational. kite and brawl are both good styles. I have no problems brawling in fleets, with logistics. even less so. My comment was about solo/micro gank.
hmmm, ok... I didnt got what you meant to say then... my bad. |
Switch Savage
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
222
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 13:49:34 -
[276] - Quote
Quite happy links will be removed really. It makes solo vs fleet a bit harder in some heavy active tank brawl fits but I can and will adapt. Plus i am having a riot welping all my active tank fits that require links as Crosi saw first hand the other day (gf btw).
A lot of people seem to think it will magically balance things out and let them win more fights. Trust me on this one you will still very likely lose to all the same people. |
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade
250
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 14:00:05 -
[277] - 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"
|
Arla Sarain
717
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 14:42:33 -
[278] - Quote
Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote: 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
Would they be?
Extra tank is compensated with spending time applying more damage, maybe better piloting to mitigate incoming damage in this time window.
The extra speed and tackle range is hard to compensate for. You either have to get double webs, or pick a very fast ship, which is notably either without tank or DPS or both, hence not competitive with the linked ship.
Skirmish links alone do one sinful thing - perpetrate the kiting cancer further. Fights already boil down to tackle range (determining who gets the privilege of disengaging on demand, as well as offering protection against MWD chasers), damage projection and damage mitigation.
Armor and Siege links increase the error margin. Even with the added tank there are more variables in motion such as mitigation through tracking, speed, and rubber banding drones.
Skirmish links just increase the encounter envelope ceiling. |
Switch Savage
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
222
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 16:23:33 -
[279] - Quote
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). |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
939
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 18:02:02 -
[280] - 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).
That's the minimum scram range I believe. |
|
Fu Qjoo
Pangalactic Frontline Supply Agency
42
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 18:56:32 -
[281] - Quote
Squatdog wrote:Fu Qjoo wrote:Squatdog wrote:DELICIOUS TEARS.
We can't see them, can you please take off your googles? Post on your main.
I am the Chief Forum Officer of my corp. Identifying my corpmates and the black sheep in the family of our CEO does not require too much intelligence.
Wait, you are in State Protectorate? Sorry. |
Switch Savage
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
223
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 21:08:24 -
[282] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote: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). That's the minimum scram range I believe.
Huh? Its 37.5km from the HICs scripted scram which links do not effect so that is max. T1 variant of the module is less but cannot remember the number off the top of my head.
|
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
356
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 21:36:33 -
[283] - Quote
Switch Savage wrote:Estella Osoka wrote: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). That's the minimum scram range I believe. Huh? Its 37.5km from the HICs scripted scram which links do not effect so that is max. T1 variant of the module is less but cannot remember the number off the top of my head.
I think it's right at 30km with level 5 heavy dictor.
|
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
356
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 21:41:46 -
[284] - Quote
Switch Savage wrote:Quite happy links will be removed really. It makes solo vs fleet a bit harder in some heavy active tank brawl fits but I can and will adapt. Plus i am having a riot welping all my active tank fits that require links as Crosi saw first hand the other day (gf btw).
A lot of people seem to think it will magically balance things out and let them win more fights. Trust me on this one you will still very likely lose to all the same people.
Links aren't being removed. If the command destroyers are any indication, CCP wants to add more link ships to the game before they make them on-grid only.
You know, to make sure the blobs have links while the individuals and small gangs won't.
The blobs will just have a few people get into link capable ships.
The 'losers' that solo with links, will just use ecm/logi alts. Then the people who complained about offgrid links will complain about cloaks, and ecm, and cheap logi, and multiboxing. |
ALUCARD 1208
Spiritus Draconis Spaceship Bebop
429
|
Posted - 2015.12.15 23:14:57 -
[285] - Quote
you forgot bout implants
BEBOPS ODE TO PERUNGA
|
Squatdog
State Protectorate Caldari State
200
|
Posted - 2015.12.16 02:42:19 -
[286] - Quote
Fu Qjoo wrote:Squatdog wrote:Fu Qjoo wrote:Squatdog wrote:DELICIOUS TEARS.
We can't see them, can you please take off your googles? Post on your main. I am the Chief Forum Officer of my corp. Identifying my corpmates and the black sheep in the family of our CEO does not require too much intelligence. Wait, you are in State Protectorate? Sorry.
You are a cyno alt with 27 losses and no kills.
Post on your main.
|
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
44
|
Posted - 2015.12.16 03:37:02 -
[287] - Quote
I think we all need to discuss one specific issue more closely.
Regardless of whether links are a "good" or "bad" mechanic, which is inherently subjective, what can we all agree for certain about links?
I believe there is no question that links disguise the strength of enemy ships. Put another way, they create uncertainty about the enemy strength, and this is true whether there is one enemy or a whole fleet.
So what?
So, one of the big "time investment" barriers to engaging the enemy is determining their strength. This is why we keep an eye on local spikes. This is why we use d-scan. This is why we use TS3. We all know that we need to pick our fights carefully. And we know we need to keep an eye out for changes in the balance of power.
It is not contentious to say that the harder it is to determine enemy strength, the more time is required before deciding whether to engage.
Depending on how busy you are in real life, and how much you like "the hunt" or "the fight" as game play styles, the time invested in order to get a fight is a real problem.
This has been my greatest frustration with links. You log on, you fit a ship, your corp buddies are also online. Great! Now you can go out looking for small gang PVP. Get some fights.
Except, you can't. Not really.
Because of the ridiculous power of off grid boosts, the range of enemy strength that can destroy a small gang goes from a large blob to one ship.
Without links, you can say with certainty whether the ships in system can offer a fair fight. You can look for such a system, and look to get roughly balanced fights.
With links, you just never know for certain whether you are going to pick a fight you can't win.
Obviously this is not true for larger fleets. Once you have 30 ships and they only have 20, links are not an issue because you can use them yourself or otherwise overpower them with numbers.
But for solo and small gang PVP, links make even one enemy ship invulnerable. You cannot know, for certain, if you are picking a fair fight.
That makes Eve a bad investment of time, and it undermines the idea that Eve is even about fighting.
Maybe PVP in Eve is only supposed to be for massive fleets and risk averse gate campers and OGB gimps.
Maybe that is how you attract the sort of people who play Eve (and who pay for alts).
But it isn't how you appeal to people who want to fight in space ships.
Off grid boosters are not just a treacherous mechanic. They are also a statement of how CCP see and value their player base, and indeed how they see the scope and competencies of their own creation.
If links don't get massively reconfigured to address the small gang PVP concerns, nobody at CCP even believes Eve should be about space ship combat.
It is all just meant to be a chat room with space backgrounds, a facebook for chatty start wars fans. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1632
|
Posted - 2015.12.16 07:37:10 -
[288] - Quote
Pestilen Ratte wrote:My blob keeps losing to a smaller number of boosted players. Instead of taking advantage of force multipliers, asymmetric balance, hard counters, logistics and many other options available i would lke to keep doing the same thing but win if i had the skill to bring more people.
People being able to correctly assess an opponents capabilities is just as often a barrier to content.
Also, boosts dont make anyone invulnerable. They are not god mode. Lets lay off the emotionally tinged language. |
Switch Savage
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
223
|
Posted - 2015.12.16 10:00:15 -
[289] - Quote
Pestilen Ratte wrote:I think we all need to discuss one specific issue more closely.
Regardless of whether links are a "good" or "bad" mechanic, which is inherently subjective, what can we all agree for certain about links?
I believe there is no question that links disguise the strength of enemy ships. Put another way, they create uncertainty about the enemy strength, and this is true whether there is one enemy or a whole fleet.
So what?
So, one of the big "time investment" barriers to engaging the enemy is determining their strength. This is why we keep an eye on local spikes. This is why we use d-scan. This is why we use TS3. We all know that we need to pick our fights carefully. And we know we need to keep an eye out for changes in the balance of power.
It is not contentious to say that the harder it is to determine enemy strength, the more time is required before deciding whether to engage.
Depending on how busy you are in real life, and how much you like "the hunt" or "the fight" as game play styles, the time invested in order to get a fight is a real problem.
This has been my greatest frustration with links. You log on, you fit a ship, your corp buddies are also online. Great! Now you can go out looking for small gang PVP. Get some fights.
Except, you can't. Not really.
Because of the ridiculous power of off grid boosts, the range of enemy strength that can destroy a small gang goes from a large blob to one ship.
Without links, you can say with certainty whether the ships in system can offer a fair fight. You can look for such a system, and look to get roughly balanced fights.
With links, you just never know for certain whether you are going to pick a fight you can't win.
Obviously this is not true for larger fleets. Once you have 30 ships and they only have 20, links are not an issue because you can use them yourself or otherwise overpower them with numbers.
But for solo and small gang PVP, links make even one enemy ship invulnerable. You cannot know, for certain, if you are picking a fair fight.
That makes Eve a bad investment of time, and it undermines the idea that Eve is even about fighting.
Maybe PVP in Eve is only supposed to be for massive fleets and risk averse gate campers and OGB gimps.
Maybe that is how you attract the sort of people who play Eve (and who pay for alts).
But it isn't how you appeal to people who want to fight in space ships.
Off grid boosters are not just a treacherous mechanic. They are also a statement of how CCP see and value their player base, and indeed how they see the scope and competencies of their own creation.
If links don't get massively reconfigured to address the small gang PVP concerns, nobody at CCP even believes Eve should be about space ship combat.
It is all just meant to be a chat room with space backgrounds, a facebook for chatty start wars fans.
If the availability of links currently prevents you from going out and getting kills you will simply find something else to complain about after. Solo/Small gang players know they are always up against the odds that is the fun of it. We do not expect nor request fair fights you do what you can against the many and try to snatch kills against impossible odds. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1633
|
Posted - 2015.12.16 20:03:11 -
[290] - Quote
For example, One of my last kills might look like a pathetic goon griffin. What the killboard doesnt tell you is i stole that from under a fleet of 30 other goons with frig logi and algos and assorted tackle. Without boosts, most kites wont be able to go near an algos for long let alone 20 of them. |
|
Tung Yoggi
Garoun Investment Bank
116
|
Posted - 2015.12.16 20:43:27 -
[291] - Quote
Nerfing links will seriously affect the playstyle of some people, it will target blindly the annoying lamers as well as the fantastic solo samurais. It will hurt people, sure.
However, I believe it is needed right now (because of reasons). And apparently, it is going to happen at some point, so the devs are deeply convinced by the fact the whole mechanic is dumb. They're convinced to the point that they know, that somehow, it will hit Johnny McGarmur, but more importantly, Kevin McOrthrus is going to think about cancelling his alt account, and they might certainly lose money in the process. That must mean that at some point, they truly believe they have perfectly good reasons to financially shoot themselves in the foot.
I therefore expect them to try and build a fun mechanic around new linksGäó that will make this balancing pass no just a plain nerf, but some way for them to create interest in order to either convince their customers not to cancel their alt accounts, or retain more people into the game by giving them a reason to train for, and play with this amazing new feature.
Let's only hope ! |
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
309
|
Posted - 2015.12.16 20:54:51 -
[292] - Quote
Templar Dane wrote:I like my scram range active armor tanking. Without links, doing that against multiple opponents would be suicide every time.....rather than just suicide every other time. With the way the game has changed the last few years, active armor tanking has taken a decidedly big nosedive in performance. - Links were nerfed - ASBs were introduced which make armor much less attractive - Resist bonuses on hulls were nerfed - Armor rep amount bonuses went from 10% per level to 7.5% - The dps on practically everything got buffedThe last one is the big one. Weapon damage increased, fitting requirements were reduced, ships got increased fittings.......certain ships got application bonuses, some got drones or additional drones....some cruisers got an additional mid that's often another web for better application......we have new launchers specialized in burst dps.... Ships do more damage and apply it better than they did just a few years ago. At the same time the maximum dps that can be tanked has gone down. A lot of people don't like links, but they make the impossible possible. I'm a dirty rotten link user. I fight in scram range with a beefy armor tank, that's my style. I hide the links, and then sit a plex in a non-meta ship and wait for the meta tryhards to show up. I call it "fishing". Waiting in a plex in a decloaked astero, killing the daredevil that comes in and his backup.........good times. If a solo pilot comes in, and then no backup arrives I'M SHOCKED. It may not be a fair fight because of the links, but I'm usually in something they think they can take. If I had been in a worm or something, I probably wouldn't get as many customers because who on earth is going to go in on X badass ship that's already setup in the plex? Over the years I've seen a lot of butthurt aimed in my direction. "you only won because of the links" Yeah well I wouldn't have fought 3 thrashers in a vengeance without them. I wouldn't have fought a dramiel in a punisher. I wouldn't have fought 5 AFs in an astero. I wouldn't have fought a cynabal in a punisher. I'd have warped out of the plex when I saw that coming my way and there would have been zero content for anybody. You can't fight outnumbered and outshipped like that in scram range......unless you have links. Solo against many, the only option would be kiting. It's not fair that our gang couldn't kill the linked guy, boohoo. If this were a game where things like that weren't possible, where the only thing that matters is how many you brought and what they were in......it would be a much duller game. The fact that links allow you to brawl outnumbered is not a good thing. Links also make kiting ships better, so that kind of makes your whole point moot.
Kiting is better because you can strategically reposition your ship at will to avoid getting dog piled, while still doing damage from long range.
Brawling is worse because it is much easier to get blobbed when you recklessly charge into scram range.
Links do not balance this dichotomy, they are overpowered no matter which playstyle you choose.
CCP could buff scram range fighting if they really want to but I don't know if anyone thinks that is a good idea. Ultimately, kiting is rightfully the superior strategy.
As Ragged Starkiller pointed out, there are exceptions to the rule (as always). Brawling works really well, IF you stick to fighting on gates, stations or in plexes, because the brawling ship can use these mechanics to his advantage.
But in open space the kiting ship is king.
The fact is you do not need links to successfully fight outnumbered or outshipped. Just because links make it easier for you does not make them a good game mechanic. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
777
|
Posted - 2015.12.16 23:03:12 -
[293] - Quote
George Gouillot wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Burtakus wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:If your only solution is to bring your own, then you are ignoring a few other solutions. The other "counters" to links require greater input and skill on the part of the player. They aren't afk-able, and actually killing the links ship requires more than 1 additional account. So yes, the most efficient solution by far is to bring your own, rather than dedicating multiple players/accounts towards hunting them which usually just results in the link abuser running away. Honestly you are whining more than just about anyone I know. If you are willing to back up that whine I have a proposal. Ten arranged 1 v 1 fights between you and me. You pick the hull classes you want to fight with. I will place 1 billion isk on it that I win 7 or more of our fights. My only ground rules are: 1) no links and we must be in in the same fleet with just us two 2) we use a Gall Mill controlled station system so you can reship 3) T2 and meta fittings only...no faction, ded, or officer 4) no implants because I will pod you 5) BS hulls and down 6) we each must front the 1 billion to be held by a 3rd party before the first fight begins 7) spectators welcome as long as they don't interfere....interference means the fight is voided and does not count toward the 10 What say you? Burt I'll take your challenge. I'm not putting a billion ISK on it. If you want to prove something you can take it or leave it. Our relative skill at PvP has nothing to do with the fact that OGB is broken as all hell. It's the most egregious form of pay to win in the game and it's high time it was done away with. I will pay the 1 bln for you if you lose. You can keep the prize if you win. As its my ISK on the line, I will agree upon 3rd party with Burt. Only thing I am asking is to be able to take part as a visitor. What say you?
Honorabru 1v1's? The more the merrier. I'm sold. Details can be communicated here or via evemail or ingame chat. I'd personally prefer T1/navy frigs, destroyers (T1) or T1 cruisers.
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
777
|
Posted - 2015.12.16 23:14:14 -
[294] - Quote
Templar Dane wrote:I like my scram range active armor tanking. Without links, doing that against multiple opponents would be suicide every time.....rather than just suicide every other time. With the way the game has changed the last few years, active armor tanking has taken a decidedly big nosedive in performance. - Links were nerfed - ASBs were introduced which make armor much less attractive - Resist bonuses on hulls were nerfed - Armor rep amount bonuses went from 10% per level to 7.5% - The dps on practically everything got buffedThe last one is the big one. Weapon damage increased, fitting requirements were reduced, ships got increased fittings.......certain ships got application bonuses, some got drones or additional drones....some cruisers got an additional mid that's often another web for better application......we have new launchers specialized in burst dps.... Ships do more damage and apply it better than they did just a few years ago. At the same time the maximum dps that can be tanked has gone down. A lot of people don't like links, but they make the impossible possible. I'm a dirty rotten link user. I fight in scram range with a beefy armor tank, that's my style. I hide the links, and then sit a plex in a non-meta ship and wait for the meta tryhards to show up. I call it "fishing". Waiting in a plex in a decloaked astero, killing the daredevil that comes in and his backup.........good times. If a solo pilot comes in, and then no backup arrives I'M SHOCKED. It may not be a fair fight because of the links, but I'm usually in something they think they can take. If I had been in a worm or something, I probably wouldn't get as many customers because who on earth is going to go in on X badass ship that's already setup in the plex? Over the years I've seen a lot of butthurt aimed in my direction. "you only won because of the links" Yeah well I wouldn't have fought 3 thrashers in a vengeance without them. I wouldn't have fought a dramiel in a punisher. I wouldn't have fought 5 AFs in an astero. I wouldn't have fought a cynabal in a punisher. I'd have warped out of the plex when I saw that coming my way and there would have been zero content for anybody. You can't fight outnumbered and outshipped like that in scram range......unless you have links. Solo against many, the only option would be kiting. It's not fair that our gang couldn't kill the linked guy, boohoo. If this were a game where things like that weren't possible, where the only thing that matters is how many you brought and what they were in......it would be a much duller game.
Access to this kind of gameplay should not be defined by how many subs you are willing to pay.
Also, linked armor brawling was never really game-breaking in the way that uncatchable kite setups are.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1633
|
Posted - 2015.12.17 00:39:28 -
[295] - Quote
Access to supercap gameplay should not be defined by how many subs you have.
Access to freighter gameplay should not be defined by how many subs you have.
Access to blackops gameplay should not be defined by how many subs you have.
Access to ... etc
The advantages of alts in eve are diverse and widely accepted. Sorry boosters in particular spoil your ability to hunt russian farmer alts in a punisher in peace or that occasionally one might steal a kill from your blob. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
777
|
Posted - 2015.12.17 02:37:03 -
[296] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Access to supercap gameplay should not be defined by how many subs you have.
Access to freighter gameplay should not be defined by how many subs you have.
Access to blackops gameplay should not be defined by how many subs you have.
Access to ... etc
The advantages of alts in eve are diverse and widely accepted. there is no legitimate 'alts to win' argument since if you have an objection to alts you really are playing the wrong game.
Sorry boosters in particular spoil your ability to hunt russian farmer alts in a punisher in peace or that occasionally one might steal a kill from your blob.
We've already been over why links are fundamentally different from other forms of alt supporting roles.
And why would I hunt farmers in a punisher when CCP has given us the Navy Maulus which is designed specifically to counter stabs?
I actually solo pvp in reasonable, engageable ships rather than rely on afk-alt-buffed cancer to generate easy killmails. I would LOVE to see you solo without links in something not a garmur.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1633
|
Posted - 2015.12.17 02:58:28 -
[297] - Quote
Saying that boosts give a combat advantage isnt addressing the point. Cyno alts and freighters also give a combat advantage. No ships = no combat. Which is a direct advantage. Put me in a system with someone who doenst have the ability to bring 130 reships in within 5 minutes and im pretty sure i know how thats going to end.
As for your claim to flying engagable ships? Garmur, Orthrus, Geddon and Strateos feature highly on your ship usage while beyond that its blobbing people in gangs mostly consisting of svipuls and phantasms lol. Along with the aforementioned punisher combat which of course all eve should be balanced towards.
Dont get me wrong, i understand that it is very hard for some people to introspect. Its easy to remember when you have been hard done by, and even easier to forget when you do the same as what you constantly and unendingly complain about. |
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade
252
|
Posted - 2015.12.17 09:41:41 -
[298] - 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"
|
Switch Savage
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
223
|
Posted - 2015.12.17 10:42:43 -
[299] - Quote
Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote: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.
Yeah i am not too fussed about it all really. I am sure that the on grid links will have a limit so you cant just burn them around with 100mn thousands of kms from the engagement, but we shall have to wait and see. The command dessies are some of the most fun i have had in eve and are hilarious for getting kills as well as killing friends :D. |
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
356
|
Posted - 2015.12.17 16:30:29 -
[300] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote: The fact that links allow you to brawl outnumbered is not a good thing. Links also make kiting ships better, so that kind of makes your whole point moot.
Kiting is better because you can strategically reposition your ship at will to avoid getting dog piled, while still doing damage from long range.
Brawling is worse because it is much easier to get blobbed when you recklessly charge into scram range.
Links do not balance this dichotomy, they are overpowered no matter which playstyle you choose.
CCP could buff scram range fighting if they really want to but I don't know if anyone thinks that is a good idea. Ultimately, kiting is rightfully the superior strategy.
As Ragged Starkiller pointed out, there are exceptions to the rule (as always). Brawling works really well, IF you stick to fighting on gates, stations or in plexes, because the brawling ship can use these mechanics to his advantage.
But in open space the kiting ship is king.
The fact is you do not need links to successfully fight outnumbered or outshipped. Just because links make it easier for you does not make them a good game mechanic.
Overpowered in a 1v1 situation, sure. But as others have said, it doesn't make you invincible.
They make pvppp (player versus people) possible. Without offgrid links, the solo guys will have to make due with kiting and give up brawling altogether.
But the gangs, they'll still have their links. They have the people to 'spare' to put in command destroyers. They also have access to ewar, cheap logi, capacitor warfare.......all the tools they need to take down something they have tackled.
Anybody could have fired up an account and trained links for the pvppp, but they'd rather moan on the forums about how unfair it is that their superior ship and/or superior numbers lost a fight because of links.
A pair of comets in a novice I can take. Online the links, pop the exile, overload the deadspace reps, hope neither of them has a neut. Without links there's no option except a snaked up garmur or getting more pilots.
- I lost to links - I lost to logi - I lost to pirate implants - I lost to blob - I lost to ecm
How are any of those worse than the first? Is it because the links aren't on grid? It's not like there's no risk to the link ships, I'm sure everybody that has them has lost them at some point to tornados, command destroyer MJD, being probed out.........
And remember, I am specifically talking about one vs many......in scram range. Without links that whole playstyle is dead unless one is shield tanked and shipped up.
|
|
Burtakus
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
41
|
Posted - 2015.12.17 18:24:32 -
[301] - Quote
Pestilen Ratte wrote:I think we all need to discuss one specific issue more closely.
Regardless of whether links are a "good" or "bad" mechanic, which is inherently subjective, what can we all agree for certain about links?
I believe there is no question that links disguise the strength of enemy ships. Put another way, they create uncertainty about the enemy strength, and this is true whether there is one enemy or a whole fleet.
So what?
So, one of the big "time investment" barriers to engaging the enemy is determining their strength. This is why we keep an eye on local spikes. This is why we use d-scan. This is why we use TS3. We all know that we need to pick our fights carefully. And we know we need to keep an eye out for changes in the balance of power.
It is not contentious to say that the harder it is to determine enemy strength, the more time is required before deciding whether to engage.
Depending on how busy you are in real life, and how much you like "the hunt" or "the fight" as game play styles, the time invested in order to get a fight is a real problem.
This has been my greatest frustration with links. You log on, you fit a ship, your corp buddies are also online. Great! Now you can go out looking for small gang PVP. Get some fights.
Except, you can't. Not really.
Because of the ridiculous power of off grid boosts, the range of enemy strength that can destroy a small gang goes from a large blob to one ship.
Without links, you can say with certainty whether the ships in system can offer a fair fight. You can look for such a system, and look to get roughly balanced fights.
With links, you just never know for certain whether you are going to pick a fight you can't win.
Obviously this is not true for larger fleets. Once you have 30 ships and they only have 20, links are not an issue because you can use them yourself or otherwise overpower them with numbers.
But for solo and small gang PVP, links make even one enemy ship invulnerable. You cannot know, for certain, if you are picking a fair fight.
That makes Eve a bad investment of time, and it undermines the idea that Eve is even about fighting.
Maybe PVP in Eve is only supposed to be for massive fleets and risk averse gate campers and OGB gimps.
Maybe that is how you attract the sort of people who play Eve (and who pay for alts).
But it isn't how you appeal to people who want to fight in space ships.
Off grid boosters are not just a treacherous mechanic. They are also a statement of how CCP see and value their player base, and indeed how they see the scope and competencies of their own creation.
If links don't get massively reconfigured to address the small gang PVP concerns, nobody at CCP even believes Eve should be about space ship combat.
It is all just meant to be a chat room with space backgrounds, a facebook for chatty start wars fans.
Hiding ones true strength is a critical tactic in any form of combat. What you are decrying as unfair because you have uncertainty about opponent strength is no different than any of the following: Cyno ships bringing in the fleet Un cloaking e-war Keeping a combat Recon in a plex Bait tanking the tackle and the pounding the **** out of someone with a fleet jumping in from next door Faction mods Implants Drugs
Any ad all of those hide true strength. Should we then do away with them as well?
|
Dani Maulerant
Order of the Valkyrie LOADED-DICE
39
|
Posted - 2015.12.17 21:43:39 -
[302] - Quote
Burtakus wrote:
Hiding ones true strength is a critical tactic in any form of combat. What you are decrying as unfair because you have uncertainty about opponent strength is no different than any of the following: Cyno ships bringing in the fleet Un cloaking e-war Keeping a combat Recon in a plex Bait tanking the tackle and the pounding the **** out of someone with a fleet jumping in from next door Faction mods Implants Drugs
Any ad all of those hide true strength. Should we then do away with them as well?
I would've thought the difference would be clear by now. None of those are done parked, and afk.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1633
|
Posted - 2015.12.17 22:55:35 -
[303] - Quote
AFK boosts are dead boosts.
I remember killing a neutral damnation on an undock with my garmur. Took forever.
I like the fact that those opportunities are out there. |
Lucy Callagan
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
29
|
Posted - 2015.12.17 23:20:17 -
[304] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:AFK boosts are dead boosts.
I remember killing a neutral damnation on an undock with my garmur. Took forever.
I like the fact that those opportunities are out there.
especially with new zone mjd
Frugu.net
|
Burtakus
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
41
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 02:25:45 -
[305] - Quote
Dani Maulerant wrote:Burtakus wrote:
Hiding ones true strength is a critical tactic in any form of combat. What you are decrying as unfair because you have uncertainty about opponent strength is no different than any of the following: Cyno ships bringing in the fleet Un cloaking e-war Keeping a combat Recon in a plex Bait tanking the tackle and the pounding the **** out of someone with a fleet jumping in from next door Faction mods Implants Drugs
Any ad all of those hide true strength. Should we then do away with them as well?
I would've thought the difference would be clear by now. None of those are done parked, and afk.
Parked and/or AFK boosts are a juicy KM waiting to happen. |
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
46
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 03:14:38 -
[306] - Quote
Burtakus wrote: Hiding ones true strength is a critical tactic in any form of combat. What you are decrying as unfair because you have uncertainty about opponent strength is no different than any of the following: Cyno ships bringing in the fleet Un cloaking e-war Keeping a combat Recon in a plex Bait tanking the tackle and the pounding the **** out of someone with a fleet jumping in from next door Faction mods Implants Drugs
Any ad all of those hide true strength. Should we then do away with them as well?
You misread me. I don't decry them because they are unfair. I decry them because they make the basic deal offered to pilots suspect (one subscription one pilot one ship), and that erodes confidence in CCP.
I also decry them because they add to the already long time it takes to assess the battlefield.
Let's be clear: if it takes too long to get a fight, or if the fights are always easily won by the guy who invests the most money and time, people will stop logging on to find quick fights.
Arguably this has already happened, and keeps happening. New player retention is not great. Bitter vet disease is a thing.
I accept that some folks love to spend more money and time and therefore achieve an overwhelming advantage over the guys who just want to pew in a reasonable time frame.
I also accept that CCP have the liberty to go after their own choice of demographic.
So then the issue becomes integrity. If CCP want to make a game explicitly suited to those gamers who like to pay double fees for advanatages, and who have all day and night to spend setting up massively unfair fights......
Well then, say so. Out loud.
Stop wasting the time of normal people who want to test their skill in space ship combat without giving up their job or paying through the nose for the privilege.
If Eve is going to be a long, hard wait for an unfair fight which the richest guy wins (which is reasonably realistic in terms of actual warfare), then stop advertising it as an exciting team game where normal people (with jobs and lives and such) can come have a good time blowing up space ships.
It is up to CCP to choose their demographic and deal honestly with it.
Otherwise the whole thing is a shabby nerd scam that faces a bleak future in the normal person community.
Don't get me wrong. Howsoever CCP wish to go, I wish them the best of luck. If they can all make a living by catering to rich folk who spend all day online to blow up pixels in a massively unfair fight, I say they are doing well, and may they prosper evermore.
But don't try and sell me a product that was never meant for me. That's just a scam.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1633
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 03:31:11 -
[307] - Quote
I have a friend who boosts for me off grid. therefor your entire argument is invalid based on something you cannot prove either way.
It was a funny post though, people needing more than one account erodes CCPs integrity? Do you even EVE? |
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
310
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 05:40:14 -
[308] - Quote
Burtakus wrote:
Parked and/or AFK boosts are a juicy KM waiting to happen.
Even if you use a multi-screen or multi-monitor setup, it's impossible to focus on both your main and your alt at the same time, especially if you're involved in intensive combat. So at least one of your characters is going to be AFK at least some of the time (as far as using an alt goes).
You could hide behind a semantic illusion since even if you aren't watching the alt you are still technically at the keyboard, and not away from it, but as far as I know there isn't a term for ignoring or not paying attention at all to a game you are currently playing, so AFK seems to be the only reasonable term to use.
If AFK is a reasonable term to use to describe the act of ignoring your alt for a bit while you do PvP, then off grid boosters are certainly AFK for a significant amount of time that cannot reasonably be ignored. |
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
310
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 06:10:05 -
[309] - Quote
@ Templar Dane
One of the main arguments against links is that they are relatively cheap compared to the implants and expensive modules you would have to buy in order to have equivalent stats, but I'm not sure the math is sound behind this argument because it doesn't consider all of the months of game time and skill purchases needed to get the boosting character to that level in the first place; as far as I know it only considers the T3 he will fly + implants.
Links are (currently) overpowered in any situation, because off grid boosters are the only ships in the game that can operate almost completely AFK (as long as you check regularly for probes you are fine) from a secondary account by the same person, while being off grid, interdiction nullified, sporting a cloaking device, requiring literally zero participation from other players, and although it is possible to probe them, it's still very difficult without a high level character because the T3 has a small signature radius and high sensor strength. They do not make you invincible, but being technically VINCIBLE is not necessarily a part of the equation.
All those reasons combined is why off grid links are one of the most broken game mechanics. At least if the booster is on grid and being flown by a real player then their existence in the game is somewhat defensible, even if their bonuses are still over powered (which is another issue).
You might say you get what you pay for, and off grid links are justified by their cost, but the game would certainly be better off if CCP limited the pay-to-win strictly to buying game time and plexes, and limit ships to being flown by an active player (at least as much as possible) instead of having ships specifically designed to be operated as off grid AFK-mobiles.
Now, it has been demonstrated countless times over the years that pvppp is possible without links, even for brawlers. It's not easy for anyone, and it's even less easy for brawlers because it requires so much more strategy and skill to pull off without dying horribly. Even for a successful solo brawler, the odds of getting tackled helplessly and then blobbed or shut down from afar are so much higher, just because the brawler almost always operates at such a close range. When you commit to scram range, you commit to being scrammed, webbed, neuted, etc. The disadvantages to flying in scram range versus out of scram range are obvious.
This is the fundamental disadvantage of "brawling". Links don't fix this "problem", they're just advantageous for anyone who's in a combat situation.
You say people are moaning about how unfair links are even though they could have trained for links themselves, but I say that you're moaning about how unfair kiting is (because it's fundamentally the superior strategy) when you could easily choose to fly kiting ships. Again, just because off grid links fix your pvp problems doesn't make them OK. The fact that links allow you to warp into two Comets and brawl them down is a BAD thing, not a good thing. Bringing the links on grid with an actual person sitting in them sounds more fair to me. And if you want to disadvantage yourself by brawling then that is your problem.
As for blobs still having access to links; that's a fundamental advantage of flying in groups. There is strength in numbers. Expecting to be able to brawl people toe to toe while outnumbered is unrealistic and lazy. Put in the required amount of effort and pvppp is very much doable, but if you insist on brawling it's going to be that much tougher because when you brawl against overwhelming forces, you are purposefully backing yourself into a corner and giving the enemy exactly what they want. |
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
310
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 06:17:27 -
[310] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:I have a friend who boosts for me off grid. Just to be clear, if your friend boosts for you, you should have no problem with links being put on grid, right? |
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1633
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 09:43:08 -
[311] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:I have a friend who boosts for me off grid. Just to be clear, if your friend boosts for you, you should have no problem with links being put on grid, right?
If i remember correctly, he said something about t3's not being abe to survive on grid in their current form. And many skirmish based commandships being unfit to support their fleet.
Also, my friend is going to have to tripple box command destroyers to retian a full set of skirmish links not to mention that there will be many plexes that create asymmetrial fights that rely on links instead of numbers that will sim[ply not be possible (or at least not worth the risk).
I thiknk thats what he said. |
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
356
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 12:22:23 -
[312] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:@ Templar Dane
stuff
Story time.
I started eve in early '06. Never saw a video of it, didn't know anybody that played it. I went in blind.
Started my trial, undocked my rookie ship, asked the people in local what I should do and was told to mine. I warped to a belt.....and WOAH. A megathron is there mining. That ship is HUGE.
I saw cans littered around the belt, I inspected them and saw loot.....so I took it. I looted all the cans but one, it was right next to the megathron. Oh sweet, it's that veldspar stuff people told me to mine. This guy must not want it.
There was an issue though, it was way more than my rookie ship could hold. I opened my cargohold to see if there was anything I wanted to drop so I would have more room for the veldspar.
SHIELD DAMGE OMG, the megathron is attacking me! oh god oh god oh god what do I do. Then these npcs show up, and blow up the megathron.
Having no clue what just happened, I left that system and looked for one that was empty. I ended up in lowsec, which I had no clue was bad for a noob. BUT I made it work and lived there, eventually getting more accounts. I camped a 4/10 static plex with a punisher and killed the bears that were more clueless than me. Taking down cruisers/battlecruisers with my frigate was so much fun, I made that my little niche. I pirated the bears and avoided the other pirates because every time I fought one, it turned into me versus a gang.
Fast forward to the early days of FW. It was a killmail buffet. Oh sure, most weren't much of a challenge since I had years of specialization in frigate/destroyer combat and the skillpoints to match. Eventually the enemy figured out that taking me on solo was a bad idea and I couldn't get fights unless I was outshipped and/or heavily outnumbered.
I had to change my tactics. I still brawled but I did it with a tanky ship fitted with deadspace/faction mods, and I had HG slaves. I got fights again by taking on multiple opponents, usually pairs. Eventually they figured out two guys wasn't enough, and it was rare to get a fight that wasn't 1v6.
At that point isk couldn't get me any further, there was only one other thing to do......bring my other accounts into the picture. I could have put them in guardians or falcons or something along those lines.....which was something I had seen others do. But the thing about doing that is people remember and they'll never fight you again.
But links were something almost nobody had or understood, at least for active tanking. There were people who used the skirmish links for their nano ships but active armor tanking was rare. I also knew how to make deep safes, so I could hide the link ship out far enough that nobody would see them.
I also started rotating the pvp accounts, taking long breaks with each one so there were always small gangs floating around that had no clue. Six months or a year and then there's a whole new milita worth of people to fight.
I was far from invincible. One neut was often enough to take me down. A griffin could neuter me down to the point where all I can do is tank until I run out of cap boosters. Eventually logi frigs/cruisers were put into the game and a solo pilot can't do **** against that.
Gangs already have all the tools they need to succeed against any solo brawler. The only ones that are safe (most of the time) are the kiters. If kiting was the only option for soloing in the game, I'd rather go play something else.
Removal of offgrid links hurts brawlers FAR more than kiters. The kiters can know if/when the enemy has links and just leave or be more careful, the brawler though is already scrammed. It's a low risk method of pvp I don't care for.
The last few years have given gangs all the tools they need and more. The kiters got new toys, IE the mardu ships. Depending on the range of the ongrid links, the kiters will also have practically safe links.
Where does that leave the solo brawlers?
|
Zirashi
State Protectorate Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 13:06:49 -
[313] - Quote
Templar Dane wrote: Where does that leave the solo brawlers?
Lol.
By your own anecdote, before you had links you were reliably winning 1v2 fights, to the point that people would recognize you on sight and immediately escalate because of the threat you posed alone. You even mention 1v6s being the norm (although you didn't specify whether you won those or not). All as a brawler. Then links come in and allow you to take on even MORE. Wtf do you want, invincibility?
Also, fighting with links and calling it "solo" is a stretch. 2 ships in space is 2 ships in space, regardless of the amount of people behind them, especially when talking about OGB. |
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
310
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 14:40:26 -
[314] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Also, id like to tl;dr what you said to TD.
"OGB are essentially afk but you have to check it constantly. Fighting outnumbered without OGB is very possible but you should not expect to be able to win outnumbered because not bringing a blob is unrealistic and lazy." - Ares
I think that just about covers it lol.
You totally twisted what I said.
I clearly stated that expecting to BRAWL people while outnumbered, and still win is unrealistic and lazy; this makes perfect sense because brawling is for all practical purposes a war of attrition and pure tank and gank numbers. Clearly if a man is outnumbered it is going to be very difficult for him to purely outbrawl his enemies without being in a much better ship or having links. As I said, this is the fundamental disadvantage of brawling.
Yes, you have to check on your OGB constantly, but no matter how meticulous you are about keeping an eye on it, there is going to be a time, probably during intensive combat with the main, when you are unable to check on him, maybe even for as long as 10 to 15 minutes, because doing so could easily get you killed on your main.
Therefore OGB alts have to be AFK at least some of the time and they deserve the title of being AFK or semi-AFK for this reason.
Now I'd like to tl;dr what you said about bringing links on grid.
"Bringing links on grid is too risky for me and my small gang; we'd rather keep them off grid, that way we aren't at any real risk of losing the link ship since we can cloak it and / or warp it the second we see a threat." - Crosi Wesdo |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1633
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 15:01:01 -
[315] - Quote
By your standard everyone is AFK at some time. Even those with only one account. Thats why your standard is worthless and nothing more than grasping for excuses to justify your dislike of boosting mechanics.
Personally, i fought people with boosts years ago. I liked what i saw and trained it myself. I guess its about mindset, some people prefer to just whine about things i guess. |
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
310
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 15:24:43 -
[316] - Quote
Of course everyone is AFK at some time. The problem is when a game mechanic can reliably operate AFK from an alt account, while flying in a far off grid and having a direct effect on the main's combat performance, and being very difficult to probe and ready to warp and cloak at a moment's notice.
There is a clear difference between ^ that and going afk while station spinning.
If you don't have a problem with it then say so, but don't twist the facts to make it sound like something it is not.
These aren't excuses. I even have my own T3 alt which I actually don't use. I just can't help but call out trash game mechanics when I see them. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1634
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 15:39:06 -
[317] - Quote
If everyone is afk at some time but its only a problem sometimes, perhaps your argument is not well developed? |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
942
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 15:47:17 -
[318] - Quote
Damn, just realized you can't really effectively park a Command Ship on the undock anymore, because all I have to do is undock a Command Dessie and trigger my MJFG. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1634
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 15:52:27 -
[319] - Quote
Yep, within 30 seconds of putting my booster on iges station while i was looking for safe bookmarks i had a command dessy try to warp me off. Was not on my overview either (thanks ccp) so im lucky the effect is so large and that i was AFK... |
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
311
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 16:35:23 -
[320] - Quote
So, if off grid links are not AFK, and are indeed being actively flown by a player, then what is the problem with having them be actively fielded on grid?
According to you, Crosi, it is simply too much of a risk. But obviously you know about the concept of risk versus reward. Why, if links are supposedly no different from any other game mechanic like Ewar and Logi, must they be allowed to be fielded off grid, potentially hundreds of astronomical units away from the battlefield?
It's true that a command destroyer can't fit as many links as a T3 cruiser, but again, it's risk versus reward. Instead of fitting your Loki to be "unprobable" (so called), you could fit it for mobility and survivability.
The answer is clear. You use an alt as a booster, and since you can't focus on both your main and your alt at the same time, your alt is effectively AFK while you are doing PvP, and when your alt is AFK on grid it is easily going to get destroyed.
If the booster ship is actively flown by a player, being on grid is not a problem (or at least not as much of a problem). But the majority of off grid boosters are AFK alts and that is why they are a problem.
Ships should have to be actively fielded in order to perform their role. Off grid boosters are not being actively fielded. They're effectively AFK. |
|
Thanatos Marathon
Black Fox Marauders
592
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 17:29:07 -
[321] - Quote
ya'll be crazy. Kill all the things.
Black Fox Marauders is Recruiting
|
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
357
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 17:43:20 -
[322] - Quote
Zirashi wrote:Templar Dane wrote: Where does that leave the solo brawlers?
Lol. By your own anecdote, before you had links you were reliably winning 1v2 fights, to the point that people would recognize you on sight and immediately escalate because of the threat you posed alone. You even mention 1v6s being the norm (although you didn't specify whether you won those or not). All as a brawler. Then links come in and allow you to take on even MORE. Wtf do you want, invincibility? I think you'll be fine. Also, fighting with links and calling it "solo" is a stretch. 2 ships in space is 2 ships in space, regardless of the amount of people behind them, especially when talking about OGB.
Yes, but if you'd read my previous statements you'd see how i explained that the game has changed. Everything does more dps. Since that time.......
- projectile dps got buffed - hybrids got buffed - tiericide etc
And at the same time the maximum achievable active tank has decreased.
The only positive thing to change for active armor tanking was the rig penalty change. AAR is trash for a long fight.
Most of those victories still relied on separating the enemy and picking a couple off before taking on the rest. |
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
311
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 18:12:21 -
[323] - Quote
So you've established that brawling is inherently inferior to kiting in the majority of cases, even though it doesn't necessarily have to be; it's pretty much up to CCP in the end.
But why don't you see this as a separate issue from off grid boosters? |
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
357
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 18:16:30 -
[324] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:So, if off grid links are not AFK, and are indeed being actively flown by a player, then what is the problem with having them be actively fielded on grid?
According to you, Crosi, it is simply too much of a risk. But obviously you know about the concept of risk versus reward. Why, if links are supposedly no different from any other game mechanic like Ewar and Logi, must they be allowed to be fielded off grid, potentially hundreds of astronomical units away from the battlefield?
It's true that a command destroyer can't fit as many links as a T3 cruiser, but again, it's risk versus reward. Instead of fitting your Loki to be "unprobable" (so called), you could fit it for mobility and survivability.
The answer is clear. You use an alt as a booster, and since you can't focus on both your main and your alt at the same time, your alt is effectively AFK while you are doing PvP, and when your alt is AFK on grid it is easily going to get destroyed.
If the booster ship is actively flown by a player, being on grid is not a problem (or at least not as much of a problem). But the majority of off grid boosters are AFK alts and that is why they are a problem.
Ships should have to be actively fielded in order to perform their role. Off grid boosters are not being actively fielded. They're effectively AFK.
Because if you're flying OUTNUMBERED and likely to die anyway, why risk an expensive command ship? The only time you'd bring out the expensive command ship would be when you have them outnumbered so bad there's no risk to the command ship.
You're totally okay with gangs having access to links but you don't want solo players having access to links.
|
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
357
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 18:26:48 -
[325] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:So you've established that brawling is inherently inferior to kiting in the majority of cases, even though it doesn't necessarily have to be; it's pretty much up to CCP in the end.
But why don't you see this as a separate issue from off grid boosters?
Because after the debacle that is the AAR, and the fact that if nonlinked active tanking became viable then that might mess up solo even more because the bait ships would have better active tanks and you couldn't break them before their backup arrived.
With the way they've been stripping utility highs from ships, the comet and daredevil are about the only feasible options left.
|
George Gouillot
Black Fox Marauders
91
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 18:55:03 -
[326] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote: Honorabru 1v1's? The more the merrier. I'm sold. Details can be communicated here or via evemail or ingame chat. I'd personally prefer T1/navy frigs, destroyers (T1) or T1 cruisers.
IG mail sent. |
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
311
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 19:21:43 -
[327] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
As i have stated, i dont know if removing OGB is the best thing for the game overall, i know that on some levels it is but on others it is not. My point is that a change like this is problematic since it strikes directly at very established play styles from micro gang up to major fleet engagements.
As i have said before, complete removal of the boosting mechanics would be a better solution to putting them on grid if balance was the primary consideration.
Sorry, I actually missed this part of what you said, Crosi. And thinking on it now I see an effect of moving links on grid that I wasn't thinking of at the time; how it would effect fleet PvP, especially on a large scale.
Sometimes I just think of how something would affect me, and not others. That is perhaps a quality that as human beings we should work on correcting. :D
The effects of on grid boosting for fleet warfare.
It doesn't really make me change my mind about anything that I said, but it's definitely worth considering.
Ares Desideratus wrote:So, if off grid links are not AFK, and are indeed being actively flown by a player, then what is the problem with having them be actively fielded on grid?
According to you, Crosi, it is simply too much of a risk. But obviously you know about the concept of risk versus reward. Why, if links are supposedly no different from any other game mechanic like Ewar and Logi, must they be allowed to be fielded off grid, potentially hundreds of astronomical units away from the battlefield?
It's true that a command destroyer can't fit as many links as a T3 cruiser, but again, it's risk versus reward. Instead of fitting your Loki to be "unprobable" (so called), you could fit it for mobility and survivability.
The answer is clear. You use an alt as a booster, and since you can't focus on both your main and your alt at the same time, your alt is effectively AFK while you are doing PvP, and when your alt is AFK on grid it is easily going to get destroyed.
If the booster ship is actively flown by a player, being on grid is not a problem (or at least not as much of a problem). But the majority of off grid boosters are AFK alts and that is why they are a problem.
Ships should have to be actively fielded in order to perform their role. Off grid boosters are not being actively fielded. They're effectively AFK.
|
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
311
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 19:50:42 -
[328] - Quote
Templar Dane wrote:
Because if you're flying OUTNUMBERED and likely to die anyway, why risk an expensive command ship? The only time you'd bring out the expensive command ship would be when you have them outnumbered so bad there's no risk to the command ship.
You're totally okay with gangs having access to links but you don't want solo players having access to links.
I'm actually not totally okay with anyone having access to links, especially in their current form. I've said before that the simplest and cleanest way to fix links is to just strip all boosting mechanics from the game entirely.
But since that seems like a really unlikely scenario, I choose to root for the next best thing; turning links into a legitimate game mechanic that requires active participation and is fun and engaging from a gameplay perspective (basically the opposite of hiding an alt in a safespot).
The obvious answer, or at least a step in the right direction, seems to be to bring them on grid. The obvious answer is not always the right answer, but I still think it is an infinitely better idea than what we have now, even if it is a disadvantage to solo players (like me).
I fight outnumbered 90% of the time, but I'd rather not rely on links. I think if they were a legitimate game mechanic you would not be able to use them "solo" unless they were fitted to the ship you are flying. I'd rather use my ambitious creativity to figure out ways to fight outnumbered without the aid of an AFK off grid booster.
The core philosophy of what you are saying is "it's too risky for me to actively field my link ship", I say too bad. You gotta risk it for the biscuit. Or just fly without links. I really don't think successfully brawling while outnumbered without links is impossible, but even if it was, that's clearly a separate issue. Whether brawling is balanced or not has nothing to do with whether off grid links are balanced or not. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1634
|
Posted - 2015.12.18 23:01:32 -
[329] - Quote
IB4 those complaining about links today are complaining about blobs tomorrow. |
Dread Operative
Snuff Box Snuffed Out
444
|
Posted - 2015.12.19 01:33:49 -
[330] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:IB4 those complaining about links today are complaining about blobs tomorrow.
or "Nice Falcon ***!" |
|
Burtakus
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
41
|
Posted - 2015.12.19 01:44:35 -
[331] - Quote
George Gouillot wrote:[quote=Demerius Xenocratus] Honorabru 1v1's? The more the merrier. I'm sold. Details can be communicated here or via evemail or ingame chat. I'd personally prefer T1/navy frigs, destroyers (T1) or T1 cruisers.
IG mail sent.[/quote
Response provided. Looking forward this no matter the outcome.
|
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
311
|
Posted - 2015.12.19 12:52:44 -
[332] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:IB4 those complaining about links today are complaining about blobs tomorrow. By the way, even if this is true, and some people just like to complain a lot, it has nothing to do with off grid links, so it's worthless in the only context that matters. |
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
50
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 01:03:08 -
[333] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:IB4 those complaining about links today are complaining about blobs tomorrow.
True that.
Even so, don't throw away the good in search of the perfect.
Let's get rid of the OGB plague, and then see about offering small gangs a chance to die in a "fair fight".
Not because I think gate camps and blobs are a bad thing, to be clear. The question is rather whether they have to be the only thing.
Is it possible to innovate (there's a word) new game play that allows small gangs with real world commitment to quickly and easily find roughly balanced small fleet fights?
And can this be done without doing any harm to the vast, rich ecosystem of Eve as it currently stands (blobs and linkers and gate camps)?
Maybe it can't be done, but imagine if it could!
Wouldn't it be great?
All that extra small gang pew!
As well as gate camps, N+1 blobs and linked gimp freaks.
It would be great. Everyone would be happy.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1634
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 03:22:16 -
[334] - Quote
There are already mechanics out there if you want fair fights its called a duel.
Ive never expected or felt entitled to a fair fight, in fact i would suggest that the whole point of eve is to engineer a situation where fights are as unfair as possible under the assumption that the opposition will do the same thing. Thats what makes EVE pvp interesting. Not vanilla, rinse / repeat kestrel vs punisher brawls.
Now i understand your thinking that fair fights = most desirable outcome. I would just suggest to you and most other people out there, they are not really the fights you remember. You remember the ones where you engaged hostiles that thought they had it in the bag but pull something extra out to clinch it.
The stories that project to the wider gaming world are not perfectly balanced 1v1s either. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
778
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 07:07:48 -
[335] - Quote
Once again, the disparity in risk/reward between OGB and every other form of advantage has been covered. Blobs require friends...it's an MMO. Falcons/logi/etc. have to be risked on grid and provide a far more narrow advantage than OGB.
None of the aforementioned red herrings is anywhere near as oppressive as the semi-AFK booster pet.
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
778
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 07:09:33 -
[336] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:There are already mechanics out there if you want fair fights its called a duel.
Ive never expected or felt entitled to a fair fight, in fact i would suggest that the whole point of eve is to engineer a situation where fights are as unfair as possible under the assumption that the opposition will do the same thing. Thats what makes EVE pvp interesting. Not vanilla, rinse / repeat kestrel vs punisher brawls.
Now i understand your thinking that fair fights = most desirable outcome. I would just suggest to you and most other people out there, they are not really the fights you remember. You remember the ones where you engaged hostiles that thought they had it in the bag but pull something extra out to clinch it.
The stories that project to the wider gaming world are not perfectly balanced 1v1s either.
Fair/unfair should be a function of in-game rather than out of game investment.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1634
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 10:50:27 -
[337] - Quote
Another p2w aegument. As i have said, from every functional level you cannot distinguish between my booster as either an alt or another person beyond a presumption. Your obsession with the people behind the screen is not healthy. Focus on the pixels.
Multip[le accounts are accepted in eve anyway. Less of the p2w lol. Ive just created 4 alts to watch choke points. These chars will never train a single SP but will save me a lot of trouble and time which even a booster could not do as well.
Non of them will cost my any out of game money. |
peinrikoudu
State Protectorate Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 14:04:45 -
[338] - Quote
I'm almost always out solo looking for an honest fight and most of the time I die. I accept this because I'm clumsy. One thing I hate, for example, is being pointed @70km by an orthrus because I was expecting a 40km point. You can imagine I died a crappy death without throwing a punch back. Sometimes it's a massive advantage and I'm with the op questioning ccp's motives. You just need to expect players to have links and you're gonna die. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1634
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 15:43:33 -
[339] - Quote
Sees Orthrus. Doesnt expect links. Blames other people. Classic. |
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
311
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 16:09:23 -
[340] - Quote
Crosi, the fact that it is impossible to know if your booster is an alt or a real player is a part of the problem.
If links were on grid, it would be possible to know if someone's booster is AFK or if it is being actively piloted.
I've already clearly demonstrated that off grid links are effectively AFK and you have no argument against this.
If they aren't AFK, then you can actively field them on grid and put them at real risk, the same way people do with their falcon / logistic alts / friends. |
|
Arla Sarain
720
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 16:28:24 -
[341] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote: As i have said, from every functional level you cannot distinguish between my booster as either an alt or another person beyond a presumption. Except there is no real person behind it, and it doesn't take presumption to come to that conclusion.
The entire argument that this is an MMO and you should find a booster pet, must be supported by demonstrable and practicable supply of players who are willing to play a particular role, before it can be thrown around. Otherwise it's a moot point. This is an MMO, but nobody or few people are willing to engage in one facet of it as an MMO? Reeks of bad design.
There are between a small to a few amount of players who would ever consider sitting semi-afk and boost for another person, investing their real time into this nonsense. Hence nobody needs to science it out why you don't have buddy sitting in a safe spot flying an OGB. |
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
311
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 16:36:36 -
[342] - Quote
Demerius, unfortunately pay-to-win is not a credible argument against off grid links, because the entire game is effectively pay-to-win regardless of off grid links. I agree with most of what you say, Demerius, but we must look at these issues as objectively as possible.
The only legitimate argument against off grid links, as far as I can tell, is the fact that they are one of the most overpowered and broken game mechanics that exists right now, regardless of pay-to-win.
Being off grid is such a huge advantage because not only does it allow them to effectively operate while AFK (try doing that on grid), but they're also impossible to probe unless with a maxed probing character with virtue implants. They're also interdiction nullified, and equipped with a cloaking device.
Rapid Deployment is equal to full HG Snakes, Evasive Maneuvers is more powerful than full HG Halos, Interdiction Maneuvers effectively turns T2 points and webs into heated faction versions.
The Armored Warfare Link - Passive Defense alone gives you the benefits of a officer resist plating. Combine that with the other two armored warfare links. Jeezy creezy. All that while effectively operating as an AFK alt, off grid, nearly unprobable, cloaked and immune to warp bubbles. It's crazy overpowered. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1634
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 16:38:44 -
[343] - Quote
Demerius, you didnt prove they are AFK lol.
You are using a term that does not apply by definition and even in your argument you said OGB need constant attention.
Lots of people dont manually pilot. Fleets often have anchors and are literally locking from broadcasts and hitting F1. Thats probably less involved than someone controlling a booster alt lol.
The problem is, you are just making up, changing out and cherry picking your subjective complaints to try and box boosting chars into some negative position as though your complaints only apply to them but not to other things in the game that work in similar or the same ways.
If you have the impression boosting alts are untouchable off grid, then you have already lost. If something bothers me so much in eve i try to do something about it. Thats kinda what the sandbox is about. It will be a sad day when space is not littered with nice easy t3 kills in safe spots. Specially now with aoemjd making parking on gates and stations practically impossible.
I was advocating for agro timers to force OGB into safe spots, but CDs have done the same thing with the added benefit of being a player driven mechanic. So props to CCP. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1634
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 16:44:23 -
[344] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote: As i have said, from every functional level you cannot distinguish between my booster as either an alt or another person beyond a presumption. Except there is no real person behind it, and it doesn't take presumption to come to that conclusion. The entire argument that this is an MMO and you should find a booster pet, must be supported by demonstrable and practicable supply of players who are willing to play a particular role, before it can be thrown around. Otherwise it's a moot point. This is an MMO, but nobody or few people are willing to engage in one facet of it as an MMO? Reeks of bad design. There are between a small to a few amount of players who would ever consider sitting semi-afk and boost for another person, investing their real time into this nonsense. Hence nobody needs to science it out why you don't have buddy sitting in a safe spot flying an OGB.
What a load of tripe. |
Arla Sarain
720
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 16:50:14 -
[345] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote: What a load of tripe, you cant speak for everyone else in the game. And drawing a conclusion based on an ignorant assumption about other people is really really bad. I find it hard to imagine that people mine, but lots do it.
I can't imagine people like combat scanning either, I do know that somebody does it.
But where are the legions of combat scanner mains to populate each gang/fleet on a regular basis...?
Non existent.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1634
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 16:54:42 -
[346] - Quote
Perhaps in the fleets you fly in. Most fleets ive been in over the last few months have had a dedicated prober. Back int he day flying in BOHICA fleets they had a virtuoso prober that eliminated links at an alarming rate. Even friendly ones.
Also, since alts are ubiquitous, i still dont see any real reason for you to judge mains good and alts bad. Thats like those whiny people in FPS games complaining about noob tubes. You get to make your own choices, but in a sand box you dont get to make other peoples. |
Thanatos Marathon
Black Fox Marauders
592
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 16:54:46 -
[347] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote: What a load of tripe, you cant speak for everyone else in the game. And drawing a conclusion based on an ignorant assumption about other people is really really bad. I find it hard to imagine that people mine, but lots do it.
I can't imagine people like combat scanning either, I do know that somebody does it. But where are the legions of combat scanner mains to populate each gang/fleet on a regular basis...? Non existent.
WHs
Black Fox Marauders is Recruiting
|
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
311
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 17:09:38 -
[348] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Its definitely powerful. My argument would be that its easily counterable given equal but asymmetrical preparation. People around here seem to be such quitters. OGB are defenseless and almost always not stabbed. They are easily harassed and prevented from functioning. Sure, you might need some real SP in probing to actually get a kill, but understand that most boosting chars have far more SP dedicated to leadership than you will need in scanning. That and you only have to succeed once in probing to get a kill, the OGB has to evade every single time in order to not die.
It's more powerful than any other type of combat alt, not just in terms of the benefits that the boosts give, but in terms of other combat alts having to be fielded on grid whereas OGB are fielded off grid, and there is nothing easy about being a maxed prober with virtue implants. Even if you have such a character, the OGB will simply warp or cloak when he sees the probes; overpowered.
You can insist that they aren't AFK, but then I will ask you the question you have ignored this entire time: if off grid booster alts are not effectively AFK then what is the problem with fielding them on grid?
You have ignored this question multiple times, and the only answer I've gotten from other people (and the only logical answer) is that it's too risky. This is clearly an unreasonable line of thinking and demonstrates a risk averse type of gameplay that also happens to be one of the most overpowered game mechanics there are right now. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1634
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 17:19:19 -
[349] - Quote
Yes, boosting alts are more powerful than any other type of boosting alts... Its not as good at hauling things as my freighter alt, and not as efficient at lighting cynos as my cyno alts or as practical at keeping eyes as my eyes chars in particular places are.
Are you seriously asking why a tankless tengu with no guns is not practical on grid in a frig meta? Even commandships are not suitable on grid in many skirmish fleets due to their limited speed and agility.
And i have said this a number of times before.
I have known a good number of people who tripple and quad box chars on grid. Being on grid or not is not the correct standard of judging what is AFK or not.
I cant believe im saying this but if you are at your keyboard, you are not afk. If you have a complaint about how much input any particular role requires then thats fine. But just putting links on grid will require a massive and as yet unannounced reword of all the ships and mods.
But even that will not escape the fact, larger fleets will be able to field links and smaller fleets will lose them and as such potentially not field them at all. Which will have a knock on effect on what they feel they can sanely engage.
This is why (for the dozenth time) removing boosts entirely is a better solution to putting them on grid. Though i dont really see any problem with boosts as they are, but i do see a problem with the unwillingness of a lot of players here to solve their own issues.
Also, you logged on today and killed 2 cyno alts and then got blobbed by a mixed fleet. You died because you made terrible choices, not because of OGB. |
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
311
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 18:16:59 -
[350] - Quote
I edited my post to specify combat alt, because I knew you would try and bring up other types of alts if I did not specify that. Off grid booster alts are overpowered compared to other combat alts like logistics and falcons.
You fail to consider that on grid links would necessarily be fitted differently than off grid links and would not necessarily be tankless or helpless. And again if it is too risky, then don't multi box in the first place, use the links for what they are originally meant for; fleets.
I can't argue with the meaning of AFK, so I will press no further on that front, but again your only reasoning for not fielding links on grid is that it is too risky and you would lose it easily, which clearly demonstrates that off grid links are a far safer and more risk averse choice, and that they aren't really at any risk because they only have to watch out for one thing, probes, and they can warp or cloak the second they spot those.
The fact that people will lose their boosting ships by fielding them on grid is not a good reason to keep them off grid. That's like saying logistics ships should operate from off grid so we don't have to lose them when we bring them on field. It makes no sense other than for risk aversion.
Off grid links have been responsible for some of my deaths but I'm not complaining about those and I didn't say that I died yesterday because of links. The fact that you have to bring up my loss yesterday is needlessly hurtful and has nothing to do with the discussion.
Anyway, since you brought it up, it was really because of Huginn. It was a really fun fight and lasted a good 15 minutes, and I came so close to getting multiple kills, even had one of them at like 5% structure, it was crazy close, but ultimately I lost sense of situational awareness and got webbed by Huginn.
Sure you can say I made terrible choices, but I play this game for fun and to do crazy things and not be risk averse. I just re-subbed anyway, and I'm going to come back and do better next time. It has nothing to do with off grid links or this thread, but thanks for bringing it up. |
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1634
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 18:27:42 -
[351] - Quote
I think its a bit of a stretch and kinda dishonest to say that boosting alts are more powerful that logistics alts as a blanket statement. I would assert that logistics and ewar have won more fights than boosters ever have. Boosters effect in most fights has been simply to prolong fights since both fleets have had several options of how to field their links either on or off grid.
On grid t3's would still forfeit their defensive subsystem for their command and as such will always be very weak regardless of other fittings. |
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
358
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 19:12:58 -
[352] - Quote
combat pilot + links > combat pilot
But also......
mining pilot + mining pilot > mining pilot
mission pilot + mission pilot > mission pilot
market hub alt + market hub alt > market hub alt
combat pilot + ecm pilot > combat pilot
combat pilot + logi pilot > logi pilot
It goes on forever. I'm pretty sure I never saw an ad for eve online that stated anything like "one account is all you'll ever want/need"
But I guess links were the singular reason for the downfall of solo pvp and he'll not hear anything to the contrary.
|
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
311
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 20:40:02 -
[353] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:I think its a bit of a stretch and kinda dishonest to say that boosting alts are more powerful that logistics alts as a blanket statement. I would assert that logistics and ewar have won more fights than boosters ever have. Boosters effect in most fights has been simply to prolong fights since both fleets have had several options of how to field their links either on or off grid. You're right, it is a stretch to say that boosting alts are more powerful than logistics alts, as a blanket statement. With that I agree with.
But when you also consider the fact that links are not only as powerful as they are, but also operate off grid, and having all of their other inherent advantages like being one of the most difficult type of ships to probe, interdiction nullified, and with cloaking device, how can you honestly make the argument that they are not currently overpowered?
Do all of these other inherent advantages balance links versus other types of fleet support? Are links, and link ships, so inferior to other forms of fleet support like logistics and electronic warfare, that they really need to have all of these extra advantages? |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1634
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 21:00:18 -
[354] - Quote
I dont think one class of ship has to be balanced with another class of ship. After all, different classes excel at different things. A logistics alt is far better at RR than a boosting tengu.
You can invent a classification of 'fleet support' and expect balance across your arbitrary class. But its still an arbitrary class that you just invented. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
778
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 21:38:32 -
[355] - Quote
Templar Dane wrote:combat pilot + links > combat pilot
But also......
mining pilot + mining pilot > mining pilot
mission pilot + mission pilot > mission pilot
market hub alt + market hub alt > market hub alt
combat pilot + ecm pilot > combat pilot
combat pilot + logi pilot > logi pilot
It goes on forever. I'm pretty sure I never saw an ad for eve online that stated anything like "one account is all you'll ever want/need"
But I guess links were the singular reason for the downfall of solo pvp and he'll not hear anything to the contrary.
edit
This is eve online, the game where players do anything to win. Underhanded tactics have been celebrated for as long as I've played the game.
If not links, it'll be logi alts or ecm alts or whatever else creative players come up with. A lot of people do stuff like that, and the logi alts even make kills look like they were solo. Is it dirty? Yeah. Is it unfair? Yes.
Even if ccp put in some ******* karma score to reward players for being honest, it would be the mission of the majority of players to accrue as negative a karma score as possible because that's just our nature.
The loss of offgrid links would just cause people to adapt. Then people would ***** about whatever "underhanded" thing replaced them. CCPLZ no more than one logistics ship allowed on any given grid. CCPLZ delete all ecm drones/ships. CCPLZ give me a box in options menu so that only one other ship can ever be on grid with me.
Combat pilot + links > 5, 10 or more unlinked combat pilots is actually the problem. They'll never catch him...best case scenario is forcing him off temporarily with ewar and long range weapons.
Other combat alts provide far less of an advantage in terms of leveling the playing field against higher numbers, while entailing greater risk
|
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
311
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 22:16:34 -
[356] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:I dont think one class of ship has to be balanced with another class of ship. After all, different classes excel at different things. A logistics alt is far better at RR than a boosting tengu.
You can invent a classification of 'fleet support' and expect balance across your arbitrary class. But its still an arbitrary class that you just invented.
Also, a lot of OGB sacrifice sensor strength for 5/6 links. But many would not know since they lack the constitution to try and just run to the forum to make false claims about p2w / afk / godmode and how hard they are to probe. Actually, all classes of ship must be balanced together, that's why it's called game balance.
You're right about the "classification of fleet support", but in that light, all ships must still be balanced compared to the other ships in the game, regardless of ship class.
You make it sound like sacrificing a bit of sensor strength is a big deal. It's still easy as pie to make a 5 link T3 with room for ECCM, plus you can use some relatively cheap implants to get a smaller signature.
You can easily just warp it or cloak it when you see probes. The fact that it's extremely difficult to probe already, coupled with the fact that you will just warp whenever you see probes, makes you so difficult to catch you pretty much have no choice but to call it overpowered just based on those facts alone. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1634
|
Posted - 2015.12.20 22:19:08 -
[357] - Quote
If they are forcing him off with ewar, why is it temporary? I guess that just makes your argument sound better even if it doesnt make sense?
Ive flown griffin in a few fights against snuff box. Sure boosts helped. But the fact that i was permajamming their 2 lokis meant that their substantial mach fleet was applying very little of its DPS. This, along with spreading jams from other griffins across machs IMO made more difference than the boosts being off grid. |
peinrikoudu
State Protectorate Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.12.21 12:08:55 -
[358] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Sees Orthrus. Doesnt expect links. Blames other people. Classic.
Blames other people? I think you come on here and have too many arguments. Get a life.
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
946
|
Posted - 2015.12.21 15:18:31 -
[359] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:I dont think one class of ship has to be balanced with another class of ship. After all, different classes excel at different things. A logistics alt is far better at RR than a boosting tengu.
You can invent a classification of 'fleet support' and expect balance across your arbitrary class. But its still an arbitrary class that you just invented.
Also, a lot of OGB sacrifice sensor strength for 5/6 links. But many would not know since they lack the constitution to try and just run to the forum to make false claims about p2w / afk / godmode and how hard they are to probe. Actually, all classes of ship must be balanced together, that's why it's called game balance. You're right about the "classification of fleet support", but in that light, all ships must still be balanced compared to the other ships in the game, regardless of ship class. You make it sound like sacrificing a bit of sensor strength is a big deal. It's still easy as pie to make a 5 link T3 with room for ECCM, plus you can use some relatively cheap implants to get a smaller signature. You can easily just warp it or cloak it when you see probes. The fact that it's extremely difficult to probe already, coupled with the fact that you will just warp whenever you see probes, makes you so difficult to catch you pretty much have no choice but to call it overpowered just based on those facts alone.
Warping or cloaking the command ship negates the link bonuses as they can not operate in either situation. So just by "scaring" the OGB, you have effectively negated the person's advantage. |
Oreb Wing
Black Fox Marauders
127
|
Posted - 2015.12.21 19:43:37 -
[360] - Quote
Burtakus wrote:
Hiding ones true strength is a critical tactic in any form of combat. What you are decrying as unfair because you have uncertainty about opponent strength is no different than any of the following: Cyno ships bringing in the fleet Un cloaking e-war Keeping a combat Recon in a plex Bait tanking the tackle and the pounding the **** out of someone with a fleet jumping in from next door Faction mods Implants Drugs
Any ad all of those hide true strength. Should we then do away with them as well?
My opinion on various things has changed throughout the course of this thread. The result of good argument. I think we need to be fair to recognize the differences in the bonus each of these apply though and how effective they are -- or how many one can affect -- when brought on field.
Cyno pops, everyone can see it and warp to it. Even if it's limited, you have time to react to it.
Uncloaked e-war. Only in wormholes can they take you by surprise, but in known space you can only laugh it off. You have local and the information of how many pilots are in system. If one is missing and 'suddenly spaceships'! you can walk it off without too much hurt, telling yourself, Well that's where it was.
Recon in a plex. Same argument as above. You want to avoid this, open virgin plexes. These can surprise anyone by not coming up on dscan anymore anyway. Be vigilant.
Obvious bait tanking is often done with obvious ships that have high natural resists. If someone can pull it off with an unconventional fit, good on them. Trap well done. Local is again instrumental in knowing when something is usually a bait tackler. Timing is everything.
Faction mods drop. Pays for the trouble and the difficulty of the fight if you win and the loot fairy is kind. Mods are expensive. Only one ship can have any respective mod on.
Implants can be destroyed. Bring a smart bombing cruiser or high sensor tackle ready for when the enemy ejects or blows up. Can also only be used by a single ship. Implants are expensive.
Drugs have drawbacks. One or many or all of five side-effects completely lopsided the benefits. They are limited in their time for application and could become expensive when used frequently. And you must be one lucky bastard if you do not get hit with ANY side-effects on anything standard and above. The risk is leveled out. Single use, single pilot.
Links:
Equally affect 1 pilot to an entire wing of pilots at no addition cost no side-effect a safe distance a reusable and infinite amount of times until you make a mistake
There is no grey area when the light of reason directs wisdom.
|
|
Lucy Callagan
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
29
|
Posted - 2015.12.21 23:36:07 -
[361] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:
Combat pilot + links > 5, 10 or more unlinked combat pilots is actually the problem. They'll never catch him...best case scenario is forcing him off temporarily with ewar and long range weapons.
Lol no, especially in low sec where ppl never go more than 2 jumps away their staging. D A N K refitting is so hard.
Frugu.net
|
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
359
|
Posted - 2015.12.22 02:39:10 -
[362] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Templar Dane wrote:combat pilot + links > combat pilot
But also......
mining pilot + mining pilot > mining pilot
mission pilot + mission pilot > mission pilot
market hub alt + market hub alt > market hub alt
combat pilot + ecm pilot > combat pilot
combat pilot + logi pilot > logi pilot
It goes on forever. I'm pretty sure I never saw an ad for eve online that stated anything like "one account is all you'll ever want/need"
But I guess links were the singular reason for the downfall of solo pvp and he'll not hear anything to the contrary.
edit
This is eve online, the game where players do anything to win. Underhanded tactics have been celebrated for as long as I've played the game.
If not links, it'll be logi alts or ecm alts or whatever else creative players come up with. A lot of people do stuff like that, and the logi alts even make kills look like they were solo. Is it dirty? Yeah. Is it unfair? Yes.
Even if ccp put in some ******* karma score to reward players for being honest, it would be the mission of the majority of players to accrue as negative a karma score as possible because that's just our nature.
The loss of offgrid links would just cause people to adapt. Then people would ***** about whatever "underhanded" thing replaced them. CCPLZ no more than one logistics ship allowed on any given grid. CCPLZ delete all ecm drones/ships. CCPLZ give me a box in options menu so that only one other ship can ever be on grid with me. Combat pilot + links > 5, 10 or more unlinked combat pilots is actually the problem. They'll never catch him...best case scenario is forcing him off temporarily with ewar and long range weapons. Other combat alts provide far less of an advantage in terms of leveling the playing field against higher numbers, while entailing greater risk
You're talking about kiting. Multiple pilots against a kiting pilot can work if you position yourself right, he'll either get caught or forced off.
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
949
|
Posted - 2015.12.22 14:24:27 -
[363] - Quote
Someone proposed an idea in Player Features and Ideas.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=460705&find=unread |
Bastion Arzi
Angry Mustellid Decayed Orbit
316
|
Posted - 2015.12.22 14:46:03 -
[364] - Quote
why dont people just probe down the links and kill them?
its not as if it cant be done |
George Gouillot
Black Fox Marauders
92
|
Posted - 2015.12.22 14:56:40 -
[365] - Quote
Bastion Arzi wrote:why dont people just probe down the links and kill them? its not as if it cant be done
Because this would involve effort. Whining on forum not that much. |
Oreb Wing
Black Fox Marauders
128
|
Posted - 2015.12.22 15:13:58 -
[366] - Quote
Osoka's link is about making links spread by squad and not hierarchically trickle down to an entire wing, when you have skilled squad commanders. It's an interesting idea. It may be a solution, but you will only have five off grid boosters instead of one. It would be strange and I would rather see one ship boosting on-grid than encourage the already prevalent mindset that you must have additional accounts to be fully effective. Multiple accounts lead to burn out, imo.
There is no grey area when the light of reason directs wisdom.
|
Tung Yoggi
Garoun Investment Bank
116
|
Posted - 2015.12.22 16:25:18 -
[367] - Quote
Stop clinging to your soon dead mechanic, fly free and lose implants, or get friends with leadership skills.
If you were used to a certain level of performance which won't be achievable "solo" after this god-blessed patch, prepare to adjust your expectations and everything will be fine.
The non-stop fake-solo links users will only be punished for sticking to a very specific kind of gameplay, which is quite a terrible idea when playing a MMO game whose developers keep on "balancing" every now and then.
Im pretty sure at least one of you has told "adapt or die" to someone in the same situation. It might be your turn now.
ps: i had an alt and sold it months ago, i'm well aware of the difference it makes |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
951
|
Posted - 2015.12.22 17:56:26 -
[368] - Quote
Tung Yoggi wrote:Stop clinging to your soon dead mechanic, fly free and lose implants, or get friends with leadership skills.
If you were used to a certain level of performance which won't be achievable "solo" after this god-blessed patch, prepare to adjust your expectations and everything will be fine.
The non-stop fake-solo links users will only be punished for sticking to a very specific kind of gameplay, which is quite a terrible idea when playing a MMO game whose developers keep on "balancing" every now and then.
Im pretty sure at least one of you has told "adapt or die" to someone in the same situation. It might be your turn now.
ps: i had an alt and sold it months ago, i'm well aware of the difference it makes
Welcome to the thread, and thanks for not reading any of what went on before. We'll treat your response with the same disregard you have for reading what went on before. |
Tung Yoggi
Garoun Investment Bank
116
|
Posted - 2015.12.22 18:55:24 -
[369] - Quote
Oh i read quite a lot of it, sorry to contradict you. I have just not read anything that would convince me that keeping the game as it is regarding ogbs is a good idea.
Would I receive the same warm welcome if I showed another opinion, for instance being against the inevitable change to boosting mechanics ?
If you read my last post I'm hoping for something new and fresh that will make flying link ships interesting. I just wanted people.to stop beating the dead horse and look towards the future without the inevitable "muh links" and "muh precious playstyle" posts. |
Longdrinks
Leather Club Paisti Syndicate
221
|
Posted - 2015.12.22 19:59:52 -
[370] - Quote
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie/status/679385773511061508
Hope you didnt plan on orbiting at 5000km with oversized mwd on your link alt. |
|
Oreb Wing
Black Fox Marauders
128
|
Posted - 2015.12.22 21:06:05 -
[371] - Quote
lol.. Anchor on links!
Well, I just hope that they will add ...100) - 250 - 500 - 1000, etc. to grid warp selections.
There is no grey area when the light of reason directs wisdom.
|
Bastion Arzi
Angry Mustellid Decayed Orbit
318
|
Posted - 2015.12.22 21:21:40 -
[372] - Quote
i was warned of this. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
955
|
Posted - 2015.12.22 21:50:19 -
[373] - Quote
Longdrinks wrote:https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie/status/679385773511061508
Hope you didnt plan on orbiting at 5000km with oversized mwd on your link alt.
How cute, a twitter reply. Haven't seen a dev blog article on it yet though.
So far, still haven't seen a way they will balance this for hisec. Kinda hard to shoot a neutral alt flying links in hisec without getting Concorded. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
778
|
Posted - 2015.12.23 02:34:24 -
[374] - Quote
Lucy Callagan wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:
Combat pilot + links > 5, 10 or more unlinked combat pilots is actually the problem. They'll never catch him...best case scenario is forcing him off temporarily with ewar and long range weapons.
Lol no, especially in low sec where ppl never go more than 2 jumps away their staging. D A N K refitting is so hard.
You literally cannot catch a linked, snaked, defensive scram-fit orthrus or garmur without links of your own. Unless he does something laughably stupid. The garmur does 11k hot and scrams at 25-26k with domination, the orthrus does 6k hot and kills frigates in 4 shots max (if you have a shield buffer fit with high resists).
You can make it leave grid with a griffin, maulus, or sniper corms but he can still harass you any time your fleet splits up or your ewar is out of position and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it short of having a virtue prober devoting 100% effort to forcing the booster to keep moving.
So you either need a vastly outsized investment of resources or a fully active player in a specific fit, just to achieve a standoff against a single pilot and his semi-afk alt.
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
778
|
Posted - 2015.12.23 02:47:18 -
[375] - Quote
George Gouillot wrote:Bastion Arzi wrote:why dont people just probe down the links and kill them? its not as if it cant be done Because this would involve effort. Whining on forum not that much.
If I'm going to multibox a max skilled prober with a virtue set, I would rather just buy a link alt. Because the first one is useful in a few narrow circumstances while the second makes my ship 30% better, 100% of the time, and requires far less active input.
Which is the entire problem. Links are ALWAYS the best choice over any other form of combat assistance alt. They provide the most benefit for the least risk. There's no tradeoff or incentive to choose something else. Before this OGB change was announced, when people asked what they should train their alt into, the unequivocal answer was always "links." Because the risk/reward on OGB is vastly superior to anything else you do with a multiboxed alt.
And when I see people who have flown both with and against links arguing that this isn't the case, it boggles my mind. Because it's just so obvious how broken they are, it shouldn't even require argument. Compared to logi, ecm, additional dps - the versatility and scope of benefit provided by links is on another planet. One logi or ecm ship pales in conparison to increased speed, EHP, point range, lock range, and sig radius reduction for an entire fleet while requiring far less pilot input.
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
956
|
Posted - 2015.12.23 03:17:40 -
[376] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:George Gouillot wrote:Bastion Arzi wrote:why dont people just probe down the links and kill them? its not as if it cant be done Because this would involve effort. Whining on forum not that much. If I'm going to multibox a max skilled prober with a virtue set, I would rather just buy a link alt. Because the first one is useful in a few narrow circumstances while the second makes my ship 30% better, 100% of the time, and requires far less active input. Which is the entire problem. Links are ALWAYS the best choice over any other form of combat assistance alt. They provide the most benefit for the least risk. There's no tradeoff or incentive to choose something else. Before this OGB change was announced, when people asked what they should train their alt into, the unequivocal answer was always "links." Because the risk/reward on OGB is vastly superior to anything else you do with a multiboxed alt. And when I see people who have flown both with and against links arguing that this isn't the case, it boggles my mind. Because it's just so obvious how broken they are, it shouldn't even require argument. Compared to logi, ecm, additional dps - the versatility and scope of benefit provided by links is on another planet. One logi or ecm ship pales in conparison to increased speed, EHP, point range, lock range, and sig radius reduction for an entire fleet while requiring far less pilot input.
Except a link alt can probe down someone running a DED-rated site. you know, so you can kill them, or take their site. Either way you win because you get the deadspace loot. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1642
|
Posted - 2015.12.23 04:52:47 -
[377] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:George Gouillot wrote:Bastion Arzi wrote:why dont people just probe down the links and kill them? its not as if it cant be done Because this would involve effort. Whining on forum not that much. If I'm going to multibox a max skilled prober with a virtue set, I would rather just buy a link alt. Because the first one is useful in a few narrow circumstances while the second makes my ship 30% better, 100% of the time, and requires far less active input.
The first one seems to be useful in a few situations, one of which is what you consider the biggest problem in the game.
From one side of your mouth you say that OGB are prolific and ruin gameplay all over new eden, and from the other side you say that a counter to boosts wouldnt be of much use.
I know why boosts make you angry and i know why you dont put effort in to counter them. Both are the same reason, you are lazy and dislike uncertainty. Personally, i have always admired people who put effort in to solve their problems rather than just complain. |
Bastion Arzi
Angry Mustellid Decayed Orbit
318
|
Posted - 2015.12.23 09:22:16 -
[378] - Quote
you leave ur links in a safe you ARE taking a risk, u leave ur links on gate u ARE taking a risk same on a station now that command destroyers are here.
and u dont need a full probing set of implants that kill i posted i didnt have scanning implants. i guess he wasnt fit quite right but its still proof that not everyone is min maxing everything and that links can be killed.
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
957
|
Posted - 2015.12.23 16:05:06 -
[379] - Quote
Bastion Arzi wrote:you leave ur links in a safe you ARE taking a risk, u leave ur links on gate u ARE taking a risk same on a station now that command destroyers are here.
and u dont need a full probing set of implants that kill i posted i didnt have scanning implants. i guess he wasnt fit quite right but its still proof that not everyone is min maxing everything and that links can be killed.
If a T3 is fit with ECCM mods, then he is running with a few less warfare links, since command processors take up mid slots and a lot of CPU.
Someone flying a T3C OGB for max boosts is going to be easy to scan down and have no tank. |
Lucy Callagan
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
31
|
Posted - 2015.12.23 19:09:04 -
[380] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Lucy Callagan wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:
Combat pilot + links > 5, 10 or more unlinked combat pilots is actually the problem. They'll never catch him...best case scenario is forcing him off temporarily with ewar and long range weapons.
Lol no, especially in low sec where ppl never go more than 2 jumps away their staging. D A N K refitting is so hard. You literally cannot catch a linked, snaked, defensive scram-fit orthrus or garmur without links of your own. Unless he does something laughably stupid. The garmur does 11k hot and scrams at 25-26k with domination, the orthrus does 6k hot and kills frigates in 4 shots max (if you have a shield buffer fit with high resists). You can make it leave grid with a griffin, maulus, or sniper corms but he can still harass you any time your fleet splits up or your ewar is out of position and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it short of having a virtue prober devoting 100% effort to forcing the booster to keep moving. So you either need a vastly outsized investment of resources or a fully active player in a specific fit, just to achieve a standoff against a single pilot and his semi-afk alt.
rapier + keres, any decent gang has one of those (at least I often do)
Frugu.net
|
|
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
53
|
Posted - 2015.12.24 01:40:58 -
[381] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:There are already mechanics out there if you want fair fights its called a duel.
Yes, that is true, but what about small gang fights?
I think one of the chief attractions of Eve is the idea of fighting in fleets, but the problem is that this ends up turning into blobs, or it gets perverted by god mode freaks with links.
I think the FW strucutre goes a long way to redressing the blobby problems and the problems of matched ship sizes, but it could maybe be made better.
I do agree with you that the general nefarious environment of Eve should be preserved. I do agree that there should be a time and a place for links, for blobs, for camps, and for the general hunting game.
However, developing the options for small gang warfare is also an interesting way to appeal to lots of folks.
If my corp could be pretty sure of having a few roughly balanced squad fights in a session, we would get online more often.
I think there are a lot of small corps like ours. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1646
|
Posted - 2015.12.24 06:32:02 -
[382] - Quote
Lots of people say this. I guess it should come as no surprise that all these people [put no effort in to creating such content by contacting each other and making it happen. They would rather polish their dream by whining on the forums for years until ccp gves them what they ask for. Blissfully unaware that they will still not get what they want and will just gt blobbed like they did before. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
778
|
Posted - 2015.12.25 00:44:48 -
[383] - Quote
Lucy Callagan wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Lucy Callagan wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:
Combat pilot + links > 5, 10 or more unlinked combat pilots is actually the problem. They'll never catch him...best case scenario is forcing him off temporarily with ewar and long range weapons.
Lol no, especially in low sec where ppl never go more than 2 jumps away their staging. D A N K refitting is so hard. You literally cannot catch a linked, snaked, defensive scram-fit orthrus or garmur without links of your own. Unless he does something laughably stupid. The garmur does 11k hot and scrams at 25-26k with domination, the orthrus does 6k hot and kills frigates in 4 shots max (if you have a shield buffer fit with high resists). You can make it leave grid with a griffin, maulus, or sniper corms but he can still harass you any time your fleet splits up or your ewar is out of position and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it short of having a virtue prober devoting 100% effort to forcing the booster to keep moving. So you either need a vastly outsized investment of resources or a fully active player in a specific fit, just to achieve a standoff against a single pilot and his semi-afk alt. rapier + keres, any decent gang has one of those (at least I often do)
And for either of those to be effective you need...guess what? Links of your own.
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
778
|
Posted - 2015.12.25 00:51:54 -
[384] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:George Gouillot wrote:Bastion Arzi wrote:why dont people just probe down the links and kill them? its not as if it cant be done Because this would involve effort. Whining on forum not that much. If I'm going to multibox a max skilled prober with a virtue set, I would rather just buy a link alt. Because the first one is useful in a few narrow circumstances while the second makes my ship 30% better, 100% of the time, and requires far less active input. The first one seems to be useful in a few situations, one of which is what you consider the biggest problem in the game. From one side of your mouth you say that OGB are prolific and ruin gameplay all over new eden, and from the other side you say that a counter to boosts wouldnt be of much use. I know why boosts make you angry and i know why you dont put effort in to counter them. Both are the same reason, you are lazy and dislike uncertainty. Personally, i have always admired people who put effort in to solve their problems rather than just complain.
Once again, why would I invest the time and effort in a fully skilled prober with implants when links require the same investment, less effort and are far more broadly useful? They are always the best choice, out of any alt-performed role, because they provide by far the most benefit with the least risk and pilot input. You can continue to ignore that fact but that won't make it go away.
And I have hunted and killed links both on my own and with fleetmates, so please continue to call me lazy for pointing out that the effort and investment required to hunt them is inconsistent with the benefits they provide. Links are always the best option, with no disincentive or tradeoff; in a game allegedly about risk/reward that is clearly out of place.
For the record I am really sorry your garmur will be reduced to a measly 9k hot...but you'll just have to adapt or die, as they say.
|
Potamus Jenkins
eXceed Inc.
159
|
Posted - 2015.12.25 03:15:27 -
[385] - Quote
IMO OffGB do give small groups wanting to engage larger groups some force multiplier options but I feel this one benefit that may make PVP a little more dynamic doesnt outweigh some of the other problems presented by OGB. I look forward to the new strategies and metas that will be developed once we are using on grid links |
Thanatos Marathon
Black Fox Marauders
596
|
Posted - 2015.12.25 04:10:28 -
[386] - Quote
Off grid boosters in POS's were and are (mining links) overpowered for their investment. Bringing them outside of the shield increased the risk to them quite a bit. Bringing them on grid as AoE makes them a tool almost exclusively for the crowd that can afford to dedicate an active pilot(s) to the role.
Will smaller groups (5-10) still use them? Yes. Will the solo guy use one on an alt instead of a falcon? I tend to doubt it, but we've gotta wait and see what sort of link affects they will have.
The Christmas thread last year was way better.
Black Fox Marauders is Recruiting
|
Lucy Callagan
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
31
|
Posted - 2015.12.25 10:39:51 -
[387] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:
And for either of those to be effective you need...guess what? Links of your own.
Sorry but : no
Without links, a rapier can web @ 60 km cold while a triple damp keres can reduce the lock range to a sub-10 range even on a linked recon.
Regarding what you said i just wonder if you ever flown one of those...
Frugu.net
|
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
54
|
Posted - 2015.12.30 02:20:26 -
[388] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Lots of people say this. I guess it should come as no surprise that all these people [put no effort in to creating such content by contacting each other and making it happen. They would rather polish their dream by whining on the forums for years until ccp gives them what they ask for. Blissfully unaware that they will still not get what they want and will just gt blobbed like they did before.
So let me get this straight: I am supposed to spend my time contacting people outside the game to arrange small gang duels. And they are going to agree to fair play because we are all jolly good gents with high standards of gamesmanship.
Are you high?
Crosi, I think you are letting your love of Eve cloud your vision. Look at how you play the game, in your own case. Linked up and solo.
Are YOU contacting all the smashing chaps who can't wait to meet you and your buddies for a duel?
It's fantasy. Not only is it fantasy, it is not what it says on the tin. EVE promotes itself as a sandbox where gangs of friends can engage in interesting PVP pew.
It does not say on the tin that EVE is a game where, of you don't have a job or need money, you can spend your life trying to organize space ship pew pew between likeable and forthright groups of smashing chaps who are, in fact, a most devious and wretched collection of rapacious pirates.
Look, you've lost your mind, so I will tell you a true story. There was a bear out in solitude who had the idea to organize a "frigate festival". The idea was that all the local industrial bears were going to enjoy pew pew amongst friends. Well this idea was supported by all the bears, and as the day drew closer, more and more local bears started fitting their favourite ships and planning all the fun they was going to have.
Then, as the time approached, everyone remembered where they were, and who they were.
Of course every industrial gang knew players from pirate gangs, and so the system became clogged with predatious frigate destroyers, just waiting to gank the happy bears at their happy little festival.
And the bears, being bears, saw the dark clouds on dscan, and they docked in station.
The point is, this is EVE. Suggesting that players honourably devise content is the same as suggesting that players get large groups of wide eyed noobs together in one play so that billion skill point linked up predators can gank them like sharks ripping into a bunch of baby seals.
It is absolutely up to CCP to build game mechanics, like plexes in FW, that provide the possibility of game mechanics that suit THE PAYING CUSTOMERS.
In fact, you suggesting that I go do this myself is a frank admission of how CCP have failed.
Asking the customer to build the product is selling them a kit.
Kit deals, where you build it yourself, are always a scam.
They are always a scam because if the thing worked after being built, the folks selling you the kit would have built it and sold it as a working thing.
Think of cars, toasters, rifles, software, or anything else that is a real thing people buy.
The only thing the paying customer needs to do is pay, and I have been paying. So have a lot of other people.
CCP need to sort it out. They wont be the first company to go broke selling a kit. |
Lucy Callagan
SnaiLs aNd FroGs WE FORM V0LTA
33
|
Posted - 2015.12.30 02:31:34 -
[389] - Quote
So CCP is the Ikea of video games. Interesting....
Frugu.net
|
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
54
|
Posted - 2015.12.30 04:13:04 -
[390] - Quote
Lucy Callagan wrote:So CCP is the Ikea of video games. Interesting....
What?
Ikea are cheaper than everyone else. EVE is the most expensive game around.
But, I like your thinking!
Make subscription 50 cents a month and leave it as a kit!
I would pay that, happily.
The problem is that we are paying through the nose for a product that doesn't really deliver what it says on the tin.
I have a nasty suspicion that the root problem is sheer laziness by CCP. They hide behind the "it's a sandbox" mantra to avoid criticisms for the lack of user friendly game play mechanics. Instead of investing in code that changes combat gameplay, like FW plexes, they produce more and more graphically impressive objects you can look at whilst spinning your ship in station. That is easier to do. So they do that.
The sandbox argument is so lame. Nothing about EVE is truly sandbox. Gate camps are created by deliberate game structure mechanics. So are FW plexes which restrict ship types. Eve the security divisions of space are arbitrary options decided by CCP. Players built none of the rules that dictate how the game play in combat operates.
Links, the subject of this thread, are a great example of this. How are links a "sandbox" innovation? What player built links? Links are the exact opposite of a sandbox innovation, because they mimic having extra players for money. Sure is strange to have a "buy god mode" option in a sandbox.
What CCP have done is gradually built a highly complex game environment that requires a certain type of game play, and they call it a sandbox to escape criticisms of it.
That leads to weird folk suggesting that it is up to the customer to generate game content, as if it is in the players power to design the end product.
That is the same as Ikea selling you a rough log and a saw, and calling it a deluxe table kit. For ten thousand bucks. |
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1652
|
Posted - 2015.12.30 08:12:15 -
[391] - Quote
Pestilen Ratte wrote: So let me get this straight: I am supposed to spend my time contacting people outside the game to arrange small gang duels. And they are going to agree to fair play because we are all jolly good gents with high standards of gamesmanship.
Are you high?
Crosi, I think you are letting your love of Eve cloud your vision. Look at how you play the game, in your own case. Linked up and solo.
Are YOU contacting all the smashing chaps who can't wait to meet you and your buddies for a duel?
It's fantasy. Not only is it fantasy, it is not what it says on the tin. EVE promotes itself as a sandbox where gangs of friends can engage in interesting PVP pew.
It does not say on the tin that EVE is a game where, of you don't have a job or need money, you can spend your life trying to organize space ship pew pew between likeable and forthright groups of smashing chaps who are, in fact, a most devious and wretched collection of rapacious pirates.
I engage in objective driven pvp and i am not above calling for help as and when its needed. I dont accept 1v1 or any other kind of arranged fight. I do fly in regular fleets though where the FC will contact other entities and reasonable expectation are met with regards to ship classes and numbers.
But im not the one complaining about how some content is distasteful to me or incorrectly applying terms like godmore or p2w or judging other people who quite happily maintain more than one account as if it matters to me how many people are behind the pixels lol. Im not the one who thinks that putting links on grid is going to make the game fairer overall.
I just made a suggestion that would lead to the kind of content you seem to want with all these like minded forum whiners who feel entitled to a fair fight. Build your own community.
EVE doesnt say anything on the tin. If a misconception of what a sandbox is prevents you from doing what you need to get the content that you want, that is another malfunction on your part. You are fractally wrong about what a sandbox is.
As for me losing my mind and then you going of on a completely irrelevant tangent, there be irony here. |
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
55
|
Posted - 2015.12.30 11:29:50 -
[392] - Quote
You're fighting a straw man of your own creation, Crosi.
I never said I wanted EVE to be fair. I just said I wanted it to be worth the subscription and, to that end, be fun for folks who don't have all day to spend on puter games, "creating content".
As for what it says on the tin, check out the popular "This is Eve" videos.
That right there is CCP's tin, and they are saying what's inside.
Fleet fights. Lots and lots of fleet fights.
Lots of ships in the air, fighting.
Pew pew.
Anyway, it doesn't matter what we say, the market will dictate the outcomes.
Take a good look at the data:
At year end 2013, there were about 52'000 active players.
At year end 2014, there were about 44'000 active players.
At year end 2015, there are about 32'000 active players.
Eve is being abandoned by more players than are signing up, and at this rate it will be dead in 3 years.
That is not my opinion, that is market data.
My opinion, for what it is worth, is that this kind of market data follows enterprises that try to scam their customers and sell something that is not what it says on the tin.
CCP have 3 years to shape up before most of them are out of a job.
I say that with absolutely no pleasure, and regrettably as a man who has said it before to people who thought they were immune from the market and their opinions of their customers. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
966
|
Posted - 2015.12.30 15:09:54 -
[393] - Quote
Was wondering when this thread get into an "EVE is dying" rant. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1652
|
Posted - 2015.12.30 16:51:56 -
[394] - Quote
IIRC the 'OGB is killing eve' was covered early on by cearain, along with everything else he doesnt like is also killing eve since his punisher/kestrel anti newbro solo gameplay is the only thing that will save eve. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
966
|
Posted - 2015.12.30 17:32:35 -
[395] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:IIRC the 'OGB is killing eve' was covered early on by cearain, along with everything else he doesnt like is also killing eve since his punisher/kestrel anti newbro solo gameplay is the only thing that will save eve.
Lets not bother considering the reality that the built in playerbase is getting older and moving on to real life responsibilities, and eve as a niche game that attracts a weird demographic in a market with substantial churn that ties up a lot of younger gamers in the perpetual and rapid cycle of disposable novelty games, is failing (for obvious reasons) to attract substantial numbers of new players in this gaming ecosystem.
Nah, its because of OGB that eve has terrible player retention. Most newbros quit before they even know what an OGB is, because of OGB?
The objective of CCP going forward is to try and change eve substantially enough to be more appealing and accommodating to new players without alienating their older established player base. They have not done a very good job so far and continue to take massive risks in the hope that they know what they are doing.
Unfortunately, i dont think that the core of EVE has a mass appeal. Its a game of great patience with great payoffs. Patience is not an attribute in abundance with modern gamers.
That's because the majority of new players don't know what it is like to play a game without having a save point. |
Cearain
Plus 10 NV Cede Nullis
1445
|
Posted - 2015.12.30 17:50:00 -
[396] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:IIRC the 'OGB is killing eve' was covered early on by cearain, along with everything else he doesnt like is also killing eve since his punisher/kestrel anti newbro solo gameplay is the only thing that will save eve..
Not surprisingly you ignore the actual data that shows removing ogb was one of the most popular proposals in assembly hall, that still hasn't been implemented. Yep just claim I'm the only one who doesn't like them.
I am not sure what is so anti-new bro about flying around solo in unboosted t1 frigates. But really I don't care why you think it is so don't bother to respond.
I don't know what age has to do with having a real life. I had a real life when I was younger too.
Crosi Wesdo wrote: Nah, its because of OGB that eve has terrible player retention. Most newbros quit before they even know what an OGB is, because of OGB?
Yep the ship wasn't even on grid so they probably have no idea why the other guy was so much faster and tankier.
Crosi Wesdo wrote: The objective of CCP going forward is to try and change eve substantially enough to be more appealing and accommodating to new players without alienating their older established player base. They have not done a very good job so far and continue to take massive risks in the hope that they know what they are doing.
Unfortunately, i dont think that the core of EVE has a mass appeal. Its a game of great patience with great payoffs. Patience is not an attribute in abundance with modern gamers.
The way you play eve may require allot of patience and set up. But there is no reason some areas of eve shouldn't allow players to get some quality pvp without having to essentially take on a second job. Faction war/low sec would be the obvious choice. Not everyone in eve likes the idea of sitting for hours waiting for a deer to wander within range of his shotgun.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Ares Desideratus
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
321
|
Posted - 2015.12.30 17:50:00 -
[397] - Quote
Since we can't reasonably describe OGBs as AFK, we need a term that accurately describes the type of gameplay.
Something like "non-piloted, inactive alt" seems to fit the bill nicely. Whatever it is, it's terrible gameplay. |
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
57
|
Posted - 2015.12.30 23:13:44 -
[398] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:IIRC the 'OGB is killing eve' was covered early on by cearain, along with everything else he doesnt like is also killing eve since his punisher/kestrel anti newbro solo gameplay is the only thing that will save eve.
That is fair enough, it isn't reasonable for anyone to say with certainty what, exactly, is killing Eve.
But we do know that it is dying.
You are honest enough to accept the data (be careful you don't get accused of "ranting" because you do).
There are probably numerous factors that all add up to the outcomes we see. As you also noted, it is ultimately a failure of CCP leadership. They get paid to answer the question of "what is killing eve and how do we fix it?", and it appears they have not worked it out.
That is why I made the title of this thread "Why do OGBs exist?", and not "OGBs suck and need to be removed at once".
I am more interested in analysing the culture that believes OGBs, and mechanisms like it, are acceptable conduct. I take the view that people who accept a certain standard of behaviour will likely have done so in the past, and will do so again in future. This is what we mean, when we speak of the culture of leadership in an organization. In essence, what are they like?
It seems almost certain that the leadership at CCP value the older play base far more than the new player base. They value those who devote large amounts of time over those who don't have large amounts of time to devote.
They favour people like themselves, in other words, which is very understandable human nature.
There have been sincere efforts to engage and retain new players, and to try to create PVP opportunities that break down the blob meta. The problem seems to be that those efforts are not front and centre. They are something a few folks at CCP are doing while the rest of the staff design new capital assets that only a few cherished friends in the player base will ever use or appreciate.
CCP should create a separate unit to study the opinions of FW and newb fleet players, in order to build new game structures that allow easy access to small gang and solo combat. Inside FW space, that unit ought to have leeway to experiment with novel mechanics and new ways of solving old problems. They should also have significant resources. |
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
360
|
Posted - 2015.12.31 23:50:18 -
[399] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:Since we can't reasonably describe OGBs as AFK, we need a term that accurately describes the type of gameplay.
Something like "non-piloted, inactive alt" seems to fit the bill nicely. Whatever it is, it's terrible gameplay.
Mining? Mini game that if you fail your ship blows up
Ratting with drones? oh no you didn't, that's too close to afk better make the drones turn on you if you don't actively shoot rats
Market alts? well sheet. Better just nuke the stations
Heck, falcon alt feels kind of afk once you lay down the jams. Logi too. Better remove them from the game.
|
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
360
|
Posted - 2015.12.31 23:57:57 -
[400] - Quote
Pestilen Ratte wrote:
There have been sincere efforts to engage and retain new players, and to try to create PVP opportunities that break down the blob meta.
Pestilen Ratte wrote:
efforts to try to create PVP opportunities that break down the blob meta.
WTF are you smoking? There hasn't been a change to this game that I can think of that hasn't been a direct buff to blobs.
Tanking the blob got harder thanks to link nerfs and dps buffs
cheap logi ships. back in the day you had to at least risk one or more 200+mil cruisers for the same effect
buffed ewar ships |
|
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
360
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 00:17:49 -
[401] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:IIRC the 'OGB is killing eve' was covered early on by cearain, along with everything else he doesnt like is also killing eve since his punisher/kestrel anti newbro solo gameplay is the only thing that will save eve.
Lets not bother considering the reality that the built in playerbase is getting older and moving on to real life responsibilities, and eve as a niche game that attracts a weird demographic in a market with substantial churn that ties up a lot of younger gamers in the perpetual and rapid cycle of disposable novelty games, is failing (for obvious reasons) to attract substantial numbers of new players in this gaming ecosystem.
Nah, its because of OGB that eve has terrible player retention. Most newbros quit before they even know what an OGB is, because of OGB?
The objective of CCP going forward is to try and change eve substantially enough to be more appealing and accommodating to new players without alienating their older established player base. They have not done a very good job so far and continue to take massive risks in the hope that they know what they are doing.
Unfortunately, i dont think that the core of EVE has a mass appeal. Its a game of great patience with great payoffs. Patience is not an attribute in abundance with modern gamers.
I find it kind of silly that they blame links for the decline of the game. Must be links, has to be.
It's not like it could possibly be that people left when you couldn't go anywhere in anything bigger than a destroyer without getting hotdropped.
It's not like it could possibly be people getting tired of blob warfare and moving onto other games where a single player matters more.
It's not like it could possibly be people leaving because the number one way to play eve for years was sitting on a titan for eons waiting for someone to light a cyno somewhere so you could jump in and gank a condor with your 50 man gang, and then that playstyle got nerfed.
It's not like it could possibly be people not joining/staying because of the illusion that skillpoints are everything. Why bother joining a game that some people have been playing for over a decade if you can never catch up.
It's not like it could possibly be people leaving because of a spike in suicide ganks in carebearland.
It's not like it could possibly be people leaving because fozziesov.
It took a long time for some pretty basic **** to get fixed. A lot of that did get mostly fixed, but at what cost?
But wait no, must be the links. Something anybody that's willing to fire up another account or use an existing alt account could have.
|
Arla Sarain
723
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 03:22:29 -
[402] - Quote
Templar Dane wrote: But wait no, must be the links. Something anybody that's willing to fire up another account or use an existing alt account could have.
Whichever side of the argument you stand for, you end up bleeding players out of the game.
It could just as well be that that anybody has no attraction to firing up a mandatory 2nd account. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1654
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 10:26:25 -
[403] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote:Templar Dane wrote: But wait no, must be the links. Something anybody that's willing to fire up another account or use an existing alt account could have.
Whichever side of the argument you stand for, you end up bleeding players out of the game. It could just as well be that that anybody has no attraction to firing up a mandatory 2nd account.
Except that making boosts AOE will further strengthen the blob while many boosting chars will be out of a role. This will evidently lead to chars unsubbing.
Beyond a few anecdotes, it has not been established that boosing alts, or alts in general have any significant negative affect on sub levels.
Concurrent user rates were steady or rising year on year for many years after boosts were introduced. The downward trend seems to have started after certain other more recent developments that effected the core aspects of manufacturing and bloc level content.
My argument is against the assertion that changing current mechanics to seem fairer will result in more people joining and sticking with the game. The facts seem to be that as alienated old guard leave the game, the huge influx of new players to replace them is predictably absent.
The space submarine point and click RPG drama llama market is already tapped. |
Ares Desideratus
MATARSOC Minmatar Republic Marines
321
|
Posted - 2016.01.01 21:53:41 -
[404] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Except that making boosts AOE will further strengthen the blob while many boosting chars will be out of a role. This will evidently lead to chars unsubbing.
Making boosts AOE will not strengthen the blob. If boosts become AOE, they will be 1. easier to destroy because of the fact that they are on grid, and 2. easier to separate from the fleet because they don't just have to be in the same system any more; they also have to be within a specific range to have an effect.
Here are the players who would un-sub because of AOE boosts:
1. Players who cannot adapt to an environment where their dual boxed links are put at serious risk. They un-sub because they cannot "solo" they way they could with off grid boosters.
2. Alts who were only used as off grid boosters who now feel like they no longer have a role.
The first one isn't a problem because soloing without links is actually easy. The only players who would un-sub for that reason are terrible players who can't adapt.
The second one, those alts could be sold on the character bazaar and turned into ISK, used as legitimate on grid boosters for fleets or cross trained into other areas of activity.
Anyone who just un-subs because of AOE boosts is basically just a bad player who is unable to adapt. |
Dr darkside
Bath Salt Zombies
1
|
Posted - 2016.01.02 19:58:39 -
[405] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:If boosts become AOE, they will be 1. easier to destroy because of the fact that they are on grid,
this is how this scenario will turn out the blob will have more logi and keep thier booster alive, the little gang will have thier booster raped and the big guy will win. stop thinking from a solo pov and start thinking bout gangs. i have a booster and honestly think the best way to solve them is get rid of them all together.
TLDR:- Facing a big gangs booster on grid will be actually harder than probing and killing or command destroyer jumping and killing ogb ones |
Ares Desideratus
EVE OF EVELUTION
321
|
Posted - 2016.01.02 20:07:08 -
[406] - Quote
Dr darkside wrote:Ares Desideratus wrote:If boosts become AOE, they will be 1. easier to destroy because of the fact that they are on grid, this is how this scenario will turn out the blob will have more logi and keep thier booster alive, the little gang will have thier booster raped and the big guy will win. stop thinking from a solo pov and start thinking bout gangs. i have a booster and honestly think the best way to solve them is get rid of them all together. TLDR:- Facing a big gangs booster on grid will be actually harder than probing and killing or command destroyer jumping and killing ogb ones If solo pilots can fight against blobs, so can small gangs. Just because some, or most, solo or small gang pilots can't directly compete against blobs, does not mean we should keep this broken game mechanic as it is. |
Oreb Wing
Black Fox Marauders
129
|
Posted - 2016.01.02 22:57:28 -
[407] - Quote
I personally would love to see more command ships on the field. The MJD generator needs a slightly longer spool up time (1+ second for sure) and higher fitting PG to at least 20-25, imo.
Gangs, boosted or not, would probably turn a fight in their favor with more numbers anyway. Bring a rapier and increase your obit ranges to minimize the number of relocated pilots. Have more anchor pilots.
There is no grey area when the light of reason directs wisdom.
|
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade
253
|
Posted - 2016.01.03 01:31:56 -
[408] - 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"
|
Ares Desideratus
EVE OF EVELUTION
323
|
Posted - 2016.01.03 12:50:42 -
[409] - Quote
Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote: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).
Did these changes actually happen already? |
Dr darkside
Bath Salt Zombies
2
|
Posted - 2016.01.03 15:02:46 -
[410] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:Dr darkside wrote:Ares Desideratus wrote:If boosts become AOE, they will be 1. easier to destroy because of the fact that they are on grid, this is how this scenario will turn out the blob will have more logi and keep thier booster alive, the little gang will have thier booster raped and the big guy will win. stop thinking from a solo pov and start thinking bout gangs. i have a booster and honestly think the best way to solve them is get rid of them all together. TLDR:- Facing a big gangs booster on grid will be actually harder than probing and killing or command destroyer jumping and killing ogb ones If solo pilots can fight against blobs, so can small gangs. Just because some, or most, solo or small gang pilots can't directly compete against blobs, does not mean we should keep this broken game mechanic as it is.
Reading is hard yo do i not say best way to solve is to get rid altogether?? |
|
Ares Desideratus
EVE OF EVELUTION
325
|
Posted - 2016.01.03 19:04:31 -
[411] - Quote
Yeah true. When you said "I have a booster and honestly think the best way to solve them is get rid of them all together", I actually misunderstood what you meant and assumed you were implying something else.
Anyway, I've said before that removing links all together would be the simplest and best way to fix them but I really disagree with that now. Aside from being a really messy idea in general, it just won't happen, for many reasons.
Removing off grid links, however, and turning on grid or AOE links into a legitimate, interactive ship class, is a great idea because it will bring an end to a lot of the "AFK" off grid boosting alts and promote the active participation of fleet boosters, and it will even benefit solo and even small gang players because if the links are on grid they will know instantly if any of their enemies have them, and they'll be easier to separate because instead of just having to be in the same system the links also have to be within a certain range on grid.
Lazy and bad pilots will complain that their links will get shot down, but really, what kind of a complaint is that? "We can't put links on grid, are you nuts? They'll get shot down!" Well yeah, that's what happens, especially when you're using an AFK alt for the job of a fleet support ship. Adapt or die. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1657
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 00:13:43 -
[412] - Quote
For the 100th time in case you missed it. An afk booster is a dead booster. No booster is afk. No booster is godmode. No booster is unprobable. No booster is p2w.
Lazy and bad pilots are the ones saying that its too much effort to prevent boosters from operating. My t3 booster will not get shot down, its just not a combat ship no matter how you fit it so it will not be on field. I will just blob or outclass like everyone else who thinks they are good already do lol.
6000km AOE just means the same gameplay after a BM has been set up. It also means that people who want to fight outside plexes can have boosts and those that want to fight inside plexes cant which creates a rift between those two engagement profiles limiting opportunistic, out of profile fights.
Boosters become the focal point of any larger fight. All one side has to do to win is commit as much as is needed to vaporize the hostile booster(s) which will leave the victim one choice in most scenarios unless they have a number of backup boosters on standby.
Creating a scenario where one sides engagement choices let them have boosts and another side cannot due to other engagement choices will not lead to more content.
I remember a day when gatecamps were the best viable way to make people engage where you wanted them. I see a strong return of those days. |
Ares Desideratus
EVE OF EVELUTION
326
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 03:18:56 -
[413] - Quote
Yeah, I just used the term "AFK" because that's the generally understood term that people use even though it's wrong, and I was worried that Dr darkside would not understand me if I used a different term.
You can replace "AFK" with "non-piloted, inactive alt", and the point is valid. Proper AOE links would bring an end to this type of gameplay.
Links are going to get rebalanced so it should be obvious that ships that use links will also most likely get rebalanced. So if links are on grid AOE then T3s will most likely be balanced accordingly. I don't know what your blobbing and thinking you're good has to do with it, but if that's your way of adapting then good on you.
Can you explain how a 6000km AOE means that people inside plexes can't have boosts? The only way this is so is if it is specifically intended to be so, in which case it is not a consequence of AOE boosts but a purposeful denial of links in plexes.
And can you explain how destroying an enemy fleet's booster to win the battle is any different from destroying their logi to win a battle, and explain why it's bad? You make it sound so easy too. "Everyone just shoot the booster and we'll win!" With that kind of simple-minded strategy I'd say you're really likely to lose more than anything. Did you forget the logi can rep the command ship too?
Quote:6000km AOE just means the same gameplay after a BM has been set up.
Quote:Creating a scenario where one sides engagement choices let them have boosts and another side cannot due to other engagement choices will not lead to more content.
These two statements seem really contradictory. If it's the same gameplay then how is it a scenario where one side can have boosts and the other can't? If you're talking about links not being allowed in plexes, I've already covered that, correct me if I'm wrong.
And what about gatecamps? I thought gatecamps were still a huge part of the game. I run into gatecamps all over the place, but mostly in null sec. But there's nothing wrong with gatecamps anyway.
Also, links are COMPLETELY pay-to-win, they're like the definition of pay-to-win. You pay for the extra account and you get increased ship stats across the board. How is that not pay-to-win?
By the way, I've been playing since 2006 so I think I actually qualify as old guard, not that it really matters. |
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
58
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 11:20:33 -
[414] - Quote
Templar Dane wrote:Pestilen Ratte wrote:
efforts to try to create PVP opportunities that break down the blob meta.
WTF are you smoking? There hasn't been a change to this game that I can think of that hasn't been a direct buff to blobs.
Phantom Cookies.
Look, I haven't been around that long. I was being nice.
It does seem that not much has been done to reduce the blob nature of the game.
I think the answer here is to make new space in the game for evenly matched fleets of various sizes.
I made a proposal at one time about this, it involved using faction rat ships with the same group jump capability as Black Ops battleships. So the idea is that two opposing rat Blops BS would both jump to a predetermined complex somewhere in New Eden, and that both could jump a certain tonnage of ships.
The idea was that the jumps of both sides would be co-ordinated, and that if you kept your Blops alive it could jump you back with your loot. If it died..... well. Content, in the far reaches of Eve, as stragglers return home.
It would not be hard to fit this into the lore, especially faction warfare. There are already ships that do this, just not NPC ships.
One team could have a mission to smash and grab some item or NPC character, the other side would be sent to stop the mission.
Faction war badly needs some order, and some strategic incentive to go fight for the faction.
Anyway, CCP are spending their time on structures, so, yay for that. |
Ares Desideratus
EVE OF EVELUTION
327
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 17:42:20 -
[415] - Quote
So you want evenly matched battles, like in call of duty? |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
972
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 19:32:18 -
[416] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:So you want evenly matched battles, like in call of duty?
Then he should go play Call of Duty. EVE isn't Call of Duty. EVE is a bit more realistic. |
Ares Desideratus
EVE OF EVELUTION
327
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 21:04:18 -
[417] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:Ares Desideratus wrote:So you want evenly matched battles, like in call of duty? Then he should go play Call of Duty. EVE isn't Call of Duty. EVE is a bit more realistic. I agree, but I am still not entirely against the idea of some kind of CONCORD-sanctioned battle arena. If it was done right it would bring lots of content and entertainment. It would have to be restricted to a specific group of high-sec systems to work properly, to keep it spectacular, like an exhibition or something. Gambling could be encouraged. It could even be integrated into the war-dec system. For instance, if both parties agreed to settle the war over a duel. This would make sense, since CONCORD sanctions all war-decs as well, correct me if I'm wrong.
It is worth considering, at least. But even if it were to be done, it should not be for a long time because it is just too unimportant to take it off the back burner. |
Oreb Wing
Black Fox Marauders
129
|
Posted - 2016.01.05 00:58:47 -
[418] - Quote
That's already in the game. It's called Alliance Tournament. It's not around all the time. It has a point value system and a limited number of participants. Prizes. Every year.
There is no grey area when the light of reason directs wisdom.
|
Ares Desideratus
EVE OF EVELUTION
327
|
Posted - 2016.01.05 02:47:41 -
[419] - Quote
Oreb Wing wrote:That's already in the game. It's called Alliance Tournament. It's not around all the time. It has a point value system and a limited number of participants. Prizes. Every year. Yeah, I guess so. Never really thought of it like that. |
Tiffany Starr
State Protectorate Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2016.01.05 03:01:02 -
[420] - Quote
Tears of impotent rage. |
|
Perkin Warbeck
Higher Than Everest The-Culture
199
|
Posted - 2016.01.05 05:08:16 -
[421] - Quote
I used to hate links. Now I quite like them. True story. |
Oreb Wing
Black Fox Marauders
131
|
Posted - 2016.01.05 05:49:17 -
[422] - Quote
Cool story, bro
There is no grey area when the light of reason directs wisdom.
|
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
59
|
Posted - 2016.01.06 14:31:57 -
[423] - Quote
I used to like puppies.
Now I just look at them and wonder what their deal is. |
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
59
|
Posted - 2016.01.06 14:45:14 -
[424] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:So you want evenly matched battles, like in call of duty?
I don't know call of duty, but what I am getting at is that Faction Warfare is not really very realistic. There is no actual war, no command structure and no missions setting players against players in a context that suggests warfare between empires.
It is just a space with different rules of engagement. Systems in FW space change hands, but unless someone tells you, you wouldn't notice.
If CCP were to put a bit of structure into faction warfare, it might attract payers who are seeking squad engagements that have some bearing on the political structure of New Eden.
The trouble is that CCP ask the players to create the content, but CCP are the only ones who can stay loyal to the lore of the game. In the old RPG parlance, they are in the seat of the dungeon master, they make the maps and control the dice you roll.
I am probably suggesting a no trivial thing, in terms of programming and human resources, but at the same time it would be good if the myth of player created content was put to rest.
Is anyone going to say null sec was a resounding success story for player created content?
As I understand it, the thing became an empty wasteland |
Ares Desideratus
EVE OF EVELUTION
331
|
Posted - 2016.01.06 16:09:57 -
[425] - Quote
Faction warfare is completely unrealistic, but then again, nothing about EVE is very realistic in the first place. It is a cartoon. If it is truly a war, forget about having evenly matched battles, if that is what you were thinking. Instead, imagine if either faction of the war had the potential to actually take over the empire space of the opposing faction; I'm talking about the Minmatar pushing forward into high-sec Amarr space and conquering their enemy once and for all, or vice versa.
Player created content is no myth. All game content begins and ends with the player. This is a fundamental truth of video games. It has to be. It's especially true in a game like EVE, which is essentially a giant sandbox with various toys and mechanisms to ensure long lasting entertainment. We have all of the tools we need, but it's up to us to create the actual content. Even a player who only undocks once a year can be a reliable content creator. Just look at Rupee Rue.
I agree it would be nice if the faction wars had more extreme consequences, but if you're suggesting anything close to evenly matched battles, just stop.
As far as I can tell, null sec is a really cool place and an interesting game environment. I agree it is a wasteland, and a lot of it is empty, but to me that is part of it's appeal. You have of course the giant blobs waging war every now and again, fleets of players either traveling or gate-camping, small gangs usually roaming around, and the occasional lone wolf. It is a wasteland, a war zone, full of death and destruction and wickedness, with long stretches of empty space in between for a player to fall in love with the beautiful emptiness of it all.
I don't know what else you could possibly want it to be. I'm sure the sovereignty system needs some work, but it seems like you want everything to be done for you instead of going out and doing things yourself. There is nothing necessarily wrong with that, but I have to ask if that is the case then why would you even play a game like EVE in the first place? If there ever was a game where the players create the content this is the one. |
Oreb Wing
Black Fox Marauders
133
|
Posted - 2016.01.06 16:52:26 -
[426] - Quote
It was never meant to be realistic. Ever since the trial elder invasion of Amarr for their people, she the ever increasing friction between the Federation and State, Concord was stressed to allow an unofficial war by proxy through the capsuleers, as it has always since been. I used to ***** about sec hits and becoming a pirate, about my missing 2nd medal! and so looked into some back story to see wth is exactly going on and expected outcome of all this.
Well, it turns out everything is fine and the medal thing, our lack of official recognition, makes sense, along with the criminal status.
So, bludgeoning each other over and over within this intended arena (lowsec), is working as intended. Put as much effort or meaning into it as you want until CCP makes us more official with the ties we have with the sleeper tech Dusties.
There is no grey area when the light of reason directs wisdom.
|
Ashlar Vellum
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
228
|
Posted - 2016.01.06 22:58:10 -
[427] - Quote
Empires are just keeping you preoccupied so you don't get in their business. FW is a sham IC. (bla-bla, something about links to be on topic) |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: [one page] |