These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Simple Solution for fixing/removing/altering offgrid boosting
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
monkfish2345
Comply Or Die
Pandemic Horde
#61 - 2013-03-26 14:48:21 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:

The overall game balance as it stands currently has rejected defense fleets beyond gate camps. The PvP pilots simply are not standing post over their PvE brethren, they are off looking for fights.



this is a problem with player mentality not with balance.

also there is no need to actively defend space because everything worthwhile is protected by timers.

if on the other hand you wanted to mine and have a roq boosting on grid, you'd need to have a fleet able to defend it. just as you there needs to be consideration if you want to deploy any other capital.
if that is too much of a risk or you do not have the resources, then the orca is a more flexible that offers lower risk and a reduced yield as a result.

risk vs reward and all that......

and yes the fleets the damnation talked about seemed like they were slaughters, either way the damnation is a horrible ship to primary. and like that for a reason.... it is supposed to be on grid in combat.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#62 - 2013-03-26 15:29:01 UTC
monkfish2345 wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

The overall game balance as it stands currently has rejected defense fleets beyond gate camps. The PvP pilots simply are not standing post over their PvE brethren, they are off looking for fights.



this is a problem with player mentality not with balance.

also there is no need to actively defend space because everything worthwhile is protected by timers.

if on the other hand you wanted to mine and have a roq boosting on grid, you'd need to have a fleet able to defend it. just as you there needs to be consideration if you want to deploy any other capital.
if that is too much of a risk or you do not have the resources, then the orca is a more flexible that offers lower risk and a reduced yield as a result.

risk vs reward and all that......

Why are you beating a dead horse named player mentality?

The devs cannot change this, so redesigning the game in a way that ignores it only hurts the game.

And I specified exactly what would happen to rorqual usage if this was pushed through: It will simply become exclusive to the massive sov holding groups, since only they would have space safe enough to consider it's use.

After this, the rorqual needs to change in order to remain a balanced option, or it will become far less practical to field.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Vanessa Serenity
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#63 - 2013-03-26 15:38:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Vanessa Serenity
monkfish2345 wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

The overall game balance as it stands currently has rejected defense fleets beyond gate camps. The PvP pilots simply are not standing post over their PvE brethren, they are off looking for fights.



this is a problem with player mentality not with balance.

also there is no need to actively defend space because everything worthwhile is protected by timers.

if on the other hand you wanted to mine and have a roq boosting on grid, you'd need to have a fleet able to defend it. just as you there needs to be consideration if you want to deploy any other capital.
if that is too much of a risk or you do not have the resources, then the orca is a more flexible that offers lower risk and a reduced yield as a result.

risk vs reward and all that......

and yes the fleets the damnation talked about seemed like they were slaughters, either way the damnation is a horrible ship to primary. and like that for a reason.... it is supposed to be on grid in combat.
I totally agree!

Now back on the topic about the proposed changes to warfare modules by the OP: I do not see the jump timer trigger as a bad thing. Considering the boosts you get, why should you be free to use them anywhere at any time with no disadvantage? Yes, boosts does not kill anyone but having to actually think of when to use them would make the Booster ship more of a challenge to play then just orbiting. Adding to the "emergence of the sandbox" as previous posters have mentioned.

You do not shoot before you have decided to take a fight. Same way you should not sit there with extra boosting aces up your sleeve with no disadvantage.
monkfish2345
Comply Or Die
Pandemic Horde
#64 - 2013-03-26 15:48:12 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
monkfish2345 wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

The overall game balance as it stands currently has rejected defense fleets beyond gate camps. The PvP pilots simply are not standing post over their PvE brethren, they are off looking for fights.



this is a problem with player mentality not with balance.

also there is no need to actively defend space because everything worthwhile is protected by timers.

if on the other hand you wanted to mine and have a roq boosting on grid, you'd need to have a fleet able to defend it. just as you there needs to be consideration if you want to deploy any other capital.
if that is too much of a risk or you do not have the resources, then the orca is a more flexible that offers lower risk and a reduced yield as a result.

risk vs reward and all that......

Why are you beating a dead horse named player mentality?

The devs cannot change this, so redesigning the game in a way that ignores it only hurts the game.

And I specified exactly what would happen to rorqual usage if this was pushed through: It will simply become exclusive to the massive sov holding groups, since only they would have space safe enough to consider it's use.

After this, the rorqual needs to change in order to remain a balanced option, or it will become far less practical to field.


do you not understand?

right now there is no risk to fly these ships, that means that there is no reason to defend them, if you have the resources to is a different problem, you could possibly look at the timer on the roq to make it slightly less vulnerable.

A large part of the problem with ships like the roq or off-grid boosters is that they are only ever at risk because of pilot error. essentially the roq may as well just be another pos module right now. the point of all of this is to make people take risks and make decisions rather than living in risk free carebear land.

as soon as you make it that assets need to be put at risk, people will take steps to guard them. and other will come to try and exploit their vulnerability.
Imigo Montoya
BreadFleet
Triglavian Outlaws and Sobornost Troika
#65 - 2013-03-26 18:41:09 UTC
monkfish2345 wrote:
as soon as you make it that assets need to be put at risk, people will take steps to guard them. and other will come to try and exploit their vulnerability.

Another possible outcome is that people would choose to not do the activity that puts their expensive stuff at risk and choose to do something else that works for them instead, because that's what people do. Very few people are going to chose to throw their own fish in a barrel for other people to shoot, which would leave nullsec industry even more in the poo.
Steel Roamer
Southern Baptist Space Warrior Collective.
#66 - 2013-03-26 18:45:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Steel Roamer
Sandslinger wrote:
Steel Roamer wrote:
Yet another thread where people whine about off-grid boosting while ignoring the obvious counters to it.


How about this, Running a link increases sig-radius.
No-links will work in a POS shield.

Then maybe people will bring CovOps to scan/kill them.
But I presume more people will still do the same habit of "Engage Obvious Boosted pilot -> Die -> Whine on forums -> Repeat" instead of "See Obvious Boosted Pilot -> Get CovOps + Buddy -> Kill Booster -> Brag on forums".



Only whining I see here is you Roll

Should have read the OP properly. Let me spoon feed you a little bit

Sandslinger wrote:

First off lets imagine that off-grid boosting is not a desirable game mechanic, and henceforth for the purposes off this idea lay to rest any idea that it is not so.



Sig increasing sig radius is a incredibly ill thought out suggestion, if you think about it you will understand (Hint sig radius affects gun tracking and missile damage) If you still don't understand why and need me to spoon feed you feel free to ask for extrapolation.

Making links not work in POS shield is fine. It is however a rather bland solution and it doesn't solve what happens when you take T3's circle R-ECCM them and add pirate implants on top of that. Neither does it add any value to the game.

If offgrid boosting is to be fixed it should be fixed with a idea which gives bonus ships a reason to be on the field and perhaps as a added bonus actually have a decent role.


PS. lets put our monies where our mouth is I'll bet you 6 billion isk that I can stop you solo probing and catching me out in your non virtue clone for over 2 hours while still applying bonuses 80% of the time in any system of my choice. Reply in here if you take me up on it. I love it when people actually stand up for the crap they spout, let's see if you do Cool


I apologize for the late reply, I had spent my entire weekend getting black-out drunk for my birthday.
Someone also stole my coffee table at the party. Not cool.

The reason I said to nerf Sig-Radius, is that as it stands, probe-ability is a combination of Sig-Radius and Sensor Strength.
The Sig-Radius of a T3 Cruiser is determined by the choice of Defensive Subsystems, which is also the Specific subsystem required for the T3 Ganglink setup.
So simply increasing the sig-radius of the Warfare Processor subsystem would be an easy, no-rework-needed solution to make them easier to probe. Now, this does in fact make you take more damage, but if you are taking damage in a T3 off-grid setup, you deserve as much as you can get, as the enemy has countered you.
Nerfing Sensor-Strength is un-viable as it is tied to the electronic subsystem.

I agree with you that the difficulty of probing a booster is part of the problem, so I have proposed that it be changed to make the counter to such a setup more viable. And I am saying this as a character that was trained for the purpose of Seige/Skirmish links.

The reality is people are unwilling to bring the counter to the Off-grid booster, so they obviously fail at eliminating it. That is a symptom of the player, not the system.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#67 - 2013-03-26 19:14:46 UTC
Imigo Montoya wrote:
monkfish2345 wrote:
as soon as you make it that assets need to be put at risk, people will take steps to guard them. and other will come to try and exploit their vulnerability.

Another possible outcome is that people would choose to not do the activity that puts their expensive stuff at risk and choose to do something else that works for them instead, because that's what people do. Very few people are going to chose to throw their own fish in a barrel for other people to shoot, which would leave nullsec industry even more in the poo.

If you are going to insist on making observations on player behavior, and then reporting it in a relevant manner, I applaud you.

Oh, wait, I just did.

The simple and overly demonstrated fact is that players do not rush towards risk unless they believe they will win.

This is why PvE pilots flying expensive ratting ships are well known for avoiding low sec. They don't believe the risk to be worth it.
This is why we have PvE pilots in null using local to avoid threats rather than confront them. It is simply easier to avoid the risk.

If you make it more difficult for boosting, the first thing to be considered as an option will be not using it at all.

Ask yourself: What will be the result if boosting becomes something only considered convenient towards blob tactics?

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
monkfish2345
Comply Or Die
Pandemic Horde
#68 - 2013-03-26 22:16:00 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Imigo Montoya wrote:
monkfish2345 wrote:
as soon as you make it that assets need to be put at risk, people will take steps to guard them. and other will come to try and exploit their vulnerability.

Another possible outcome is that people would choose to not do the activity that puts their expensive stuff at risk and choose to do something else that works for them instead, because that's what people do. Very few people are going to chose to throw their own fish in a barrel for other people to shoot, which would leave nullsec industry even more in the poo.

If you are going to insist on making observations on player behavior, and then reporting it in a relevant manner, I applaud you.

Oh, wait, I just did.

The simple and overly demonstrated fact is that players do not rush towards risk unless they believe they will win.

This is why PvE pilots flying expensive ratting ships are well known for avoiding low sec. They don't believe the risk to be worth it.
This is why we have PvE pilots in null using local to avoid threats rather than confront them. It is simply easier to avoid the risk.

If you make it more difficult for boosting, the first thing to be considered as an option will be not using it at all.

Ask yourself: What will be the result if boosting becomes something only considered convenient towards blob tactics?


the only ship that situation that the risk of being on field is so great that it is even worth not having bonus' is with the roq. this is why I said you could look at adjusting it to make it somewhat less vulnerable. this ship was created with the current mechanics in play so it understandable that there might be a need to look at adjusting it in light of what is a fairly significant change.

as I've repeated over and over again all of the command ships and t3's that can boost are designed to be on grid. they are not hugely expensive and the boosts they give provide a massive advantage vs not using them.
Sandslinger
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#69 - 2013-03-28 21:41:32 UTC
Steel Roamer wrote:
Sandslinger wrote:
Steel Roamer wrote:
Yet another thread where people whine about off-grid boosting while ignoring the obvious counters to it.


How about this, Running a link increases sig-radius.
No-links will work in a POS shield.

Then maybe people will bring CovOps to scan/kill them.
But I presume more people will still do the same habit of "Engage Obvious Boosted pilot -> Die -> Whine on forums -> Repeat" instead of "See Obvious Boosted Pilot -> Get CovOps + Buddy -> Kill Booster -> Brag on forums".



Only whining I see here is you Roll

Should have read the OP properly. Let me spoon feed you a little bit

Sandslinger wrote:

First off lets imagine that off-grid boosting is not a desirable game mechanic, and henceforth for the purposes off this idea lay to rest any idea that it is not so.



Sig increasing sig radius is a incredibly ill thought out suggestion, if you think about it you will understand (Hint sig radius affects gun tracking and missile damage) If you still don't understand why and need me to spoon feed you feel free to ask for extrapolation.

Making links not work in POS shield is fine. It is however a rather bland solution and it doesn't solve what happens when you take T3's circle R-ECCM them and add pirate implants on top of that. Neither does it add any value to the game.

If offgrid boosting is to be fixed it should be fixed with a idea which gives bonus ships a reason to be on the field and perhaps as a added bonus actually have a decent role.


PS. lets put our monies where our mouth is I'll bet you 6 billion isk that I can stop you solo probing and catching me out in your non virtue clone for over 2 hours while still applying bonuses 80% of the time in any system of my choice. Reply in here if you take me up on it. I love it when people actually stand up for the crap they spout, let's see if you do Cool


I apologize for the late reply, I had spent my entire weekend getting black-out drunk for my birthday.
Someone also stole my coffee table at the party. Not cool.

The reason I said to nerf Sig-Radius, is that as it stands, probe-ability is a combination of Sig-Radius and Sensor Strength.
The Sig-Radius of a T3 Cruiser is determined by the choice of Defensive Subsystems, which is also the Specific subsystem required for the T3 Ganglink setup.
So simply increasing the sig-radius of the Warfare Processor subsystem would be an easy, no-rework-needed solution to make them easier to probe. Now, this does in fact make you take more damage, but if you are taking damage in a T3 off-grid setup, you deserve as much as you can get, as the enemy has countered you.
Nerfing Sensor-Strength is un-viable as it is tied to the electronic subsystem.

I agree with you that the difficulty of probing a booster is part of the problem, so I have proposed that it be changed to make the counter to such a setup more viable. And I am saying this as a character that was trained for the purpose of Seige/Skirmish links.

The reality is people are unwilling to bring the counter to the Off-grid booster, so they obviously fail at eliminating it. That is a symptom of the player, not the system.



No, just no

For 0,0 I can agree with what you say to a very very small degree. However 0,0 isn't the only place pvp takes place.

I explained quite thoroughly with a extremely common scenario earlier why eliminating offgrid boosters simply isn't a option in WH, and frankly a 0,0 camp that knows what it's doing shouldn't allow cov ops through either (although it is harder to prevent it with a 28km radius instead of a 10K one.

Making the subsystem increase the sig radius is a terrible idea and I will explain why. the side that is forced to fight with a on grid booster in the previously mentioned scenario is doomed to loosing their booster immedialty to the all too common blap dread setup.

offgrid boosters is frankly just plain silly, this is coming from a guy who has 3 chars (2 of them MAXED in leadership) and a third on it's way.