These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

WTF OMG SO MANY OFF GRID BOOSTAS
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Colt Blackhawk
Doomheim
#21 - 2013-05-28 05:58:02 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Tyrozan
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Xolve wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Removing OGB will make CCP money in the long run.. especially since 95% of people won't unsub their alts.. just re-purpose them for the next lamest thing.


Bring your own, problem solved.

It makes literally ZERO sense from a business perspective for them to remove OGB, I mean sure, it will appeal to the whining masses; but boosts are used in roles outside of PvP- If you want to stay competitive do what you have to do. It's not like Shadow Cartel doesn't drop Triage in fights against people incapable of dropping Triage; why should people who actually paid for and trained an alt to fill that role have that time taken away from them because you're unwilling to do it?

This is coming from someone without a Leadership alt.



Bringing your own really isn't an option when you're solo roaming

EDIT: Remove discrimination - ISD Tyrozan
RULE 6. Racism and discrimination are prohibited.

Needing to lug around an alt to fight other "solo" pilots on equal footing is HORRIBLE gameplay.. The "Bring your own" argument is ********.

This coming from someone who actually has a maxed out link alt.


You know that there are "PVPers" who solo roam in Condors or Vengeances and have 2 ogb in backpack?
The day ogb will be ongrid will be the day of doom for minmatar militia. The minnies are the perfect ogb

EDIT: Remove discrimination - ISD Tyrozan
RULE 6. Racism and discrimination are prohibited.

It is simply toooo much effort and work instead of being a game organising 3 ogb 24/7 for a staging system only because the minnies do it.
Siege of Sahtogas ended after minnies lost their pos and prolly thought "No pos for our ogb? Okay we deny fighting! Pah! If they think we fight without ogb they are wrong!"

Edit: Funniest thing are alliances who complain "we were outnumbered 2:1" and don´t mention that they had 3 ogb ongrid and the foe hadn´t any.

[09:04:53] Ashira Twilight > Plant the f****** amarr flag and s*** on their smoking wrecks.
Texty
State War Academy
Caldari State
#22 - 2013-05-28 06:04:22 UTC
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3079444#post3079444

Sexy Cakes wrote:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2153406#post2153406

195 days ago Fozzie and still no update.

I respect that you guys are crazy busy and there's a lot of cool stuff coming with Odyssey but can we please get an update on mindlinks/ganglinks/ongrid boosting.

love you long time


CCP Fozzie wrote:
When we have any timelines to report we'll report them, in the meantime all I can say is that it will happen sometime between now and the end of time. Very likely closer to now than to the end of time, but those things are hard to be certain about. Blink


CCP Fozzie wrote:

Jonas Sukarala
:) so what is the hold up with offgrid boosting?..... surely putting a range on links would solve the problem ... like a bubble effect

It's a performance optimization problem. We could turn on range-based boosting in Odyssey but it would melt all the servers.

And this isn't being delayed by Odyssey, the team working on the underlying code that will make ongrid boosting possible (along with many other things) isn't releasing anything in Odyssey. It's just that big of a project.

So like I said before, at some point CCP Veritas will make all my ganglink-related dreams come true but I honestly do not know when that point will be. When Veritas describes a programming challenge as "very hard" I tend to believe him.


CCP Fozzie wrote:
paritybit
I imagine that the difference is that a bubble effect only has to be checked every time a player tries to warp but links are a persistent effect and would have to be constantly checked to ensure range. This is probably okay for small numbers, but once you get 500 ships on a grid (or even in a system) then you have to check range for every ship at some high rate, meaning lots more operations that have to hit the server.

I also imagine they've thought of this, but maybe it could work sort of like a smartbomb effect but with a bigger effect radius and just happen once every 15 seconds or something.

Or maybe the check could happen upon landing on a grid or when a booster activates or deactivates (including when initiating warp) the link and then persists until the next check.

The guys at CCP are smart and I expect they'll figure it out in time without causing time dilation in systems with only 2 ships in space.

Your thoughts and words are correct and intelligent.

Once the underlying code finishes getting rewritten from the ground up we'll have plenty of options for how to apply links in interesting ways that create interesting gameplay experiences. At the moment we don't have any of those options.

So I do honestly welcome people's cool ideas about what form gang links could take. Don't limit yourself to small changes to the status quo, because it turns out with this system small changes aren't necessarily any faster to implement than off the wall changes.


This seems to be what they at least would like us to believe.
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#23 - 2013-05-28 06:24:58 UTC
ALUCARD 1208 wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Define fair. Not seen one definition that has a place in eve


+1 agreed eve is moulded on not being fair and harsh...

Perhaps, but where does 'broken' enter the picture? It is one thing to unfairness to be part of it through pure time (skills)/experience with game, but if real life money also get to count as an advantage, which is effectively what it is, then your definition kind of falls flat
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
I disagree, Improved gameplay = more subscribers

Removing OGB will make CCP money in the long run.. especially since 95% of people won't unsub their alts.. just re-purpose them for the next lamest thing.

Spot on.

It is marketed and rambled on about as one of, if not the, best PvP experiences out there .. yet CCP not only allows but encourages the use of what amounts to aim-bots.
Increase "fair and balanced" pew and you increase revenue .. FW introduction more than proved that with its large upswing in 'funzor' alts (ie. when LP/ISK in FW was no more than a rogue neuron firing in a deranged mind). Those alts went byebye around the same time as T3 alts matured.

On-grid and reduced power.
Damar Rocarion
Nasranite Watch
#24 - 2013-05-28 06:48:17 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YTro3hBqdc - if i wasnt boosted would that have been a fair fight?


Yesterday I engaged two thrashers, algos, rifter and executioner in my non-boosted non-kiting hookbill and came on top. And just to prove a point, I later barged into a plex with same hookbill as it was guarded by two autocannon thrashers and forced both thrashers out (sadly a misclick costed me a killmail).

So perhaps that was skill or idiot-savant ability trait to do Eve related math. Many others use multiple OGB to be untouchable and think they are the hottest s.it around...
Xolve
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#25 - 2013-05-28 06:52:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Xolve
Agustice Arterius wrote:
Couldn't that same argument have been applied to Learning Skills before they got rid of them? Back when we didn't know if we were going to get refunded skill points.


Technically, yeah it could have been; but CCP didn't lose 15 bucks a month per booster alt when they did away with learning skills; which was entirely my point.


Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Bringing your own really isn't an option when you're solo roaming unless you are a massive faglord.


Tell me more about solo gameplay in an MMO; the only thing worse than that guy in highsec bashing his head against a wall of level 4 missions and deriving some sort of pleasure out of his little bubble of solo game play, are the massive 'faglords' who try and apply that principle to PvP.

If you want to solo, you're at a disadvantage and you know it- complaining about it just makes you look mentally deficient.

Veshta Yoshida wrote:
It is marketed and rambled on about as one of, if not the, best PvP experiences out there .. yet CCP not only allows but encourages the use of what amounts to aim-bots.

On-grid and reduced power.


How is training a character in a pointess remap for almost 3 months (not counting actual ship skills) and sitting them in a completely vulnerable ship not 'fair and balanced'. I know first hand what the capital capabilities of the Amarr Militia are, and laying siege to a few small POSes should be simple enough; if you don't like OGB alts in FW space, then take some initiative and kill the damn towers; I promise you the end result is far more rewarding than crying on the forums.
Garan Nardieu
Super Serious Fight Club
#26 - 2013-05-28 07:10:18 UTC
Damar Rocarion wrote:
...I later barged into a plex with same hookbill as it was guarded by two autocannon thrashers and forced both thrashers out (sadly a misclick costed me a killmail).

So perhaps that was skill or idiot-savant ability trait to do Eve related math. Many others use multiple OGB to be untouchable and think they are the hottest s.it around...

Wow, those two must have been asleep or something v0v

Back on topic - while I can partially understand the argument presented by Fozzie that implementing on-grid calculations would be very server intensive and hence unlikely, I can't see why they did not nerf the bonuses provided by tech 3's command subsystems. Surely that is not something that would require major code reworking.

As for 'deal with it' argument, the only way to deal with it as far as I can see it is to bring my own (which I see as tedium I'm not sure I want to be bothered with) or to always bring more numbers as soon as there is at least +1 neutral in system in order to balance out the potential for that neutral being ogb, which is kinda lame from gameplay perspective too.
Garan Nardieu
Super Serious Fight Club
#27 - 2013-05-28 07:31:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Garan Nardieu
Xolve wrote:

Tell me more about solo gameplay in an MMO; the only thing worse than that guy in highsec bashing his head against a wall of level 4 missions and deriving some sort of pleasure out of his little bubble of solo game play, are the massive 'faglords' who try and apply that principle to PvP.

If you want to solo, you're at a disadvantage and you know it- complaining about it just makes you look mentally deficient.


There is disadvantage through numbers, shiptypes and what not, and there is disadvantage through broken mechanics, which ogb's are.

Quote:
How is training a character in a pointess remap for almost 3 months (not counting actual ship skills) and sitting them in a completely vulnerable ship not 'fair and balanced'. I know first hand what the capital capabilities of the Amarr Militia are, and laying siege to a few small POSes should be simple enough; if you don't like OGB alts in FW space, then take some initiative and kill the damn towers; I promise you the end result is far more rewarding than crying on the forums.


That "completely vulnerable" ship is so "vulnerable" that it requires a max skilled alt in a 3 bil pod and faction fitted ship to scan down and then the scan has to land with 0.5 AU range, which in most situations where you have small gangs fighting can't be done fast enough for the actual catch to happen. Did I mention how that 'vulnerable' char will have a covops fitted too and will just cloak and switch safespot once probes are spotted so prober has to spend silly (in terms of lenght of fights) amounts of time just trying to narrow potential location of that booster? True, some of these issues will be somewhat resolved in Odyssey with new scanning modules, but more could have been done.
Also, sometimes, that "completely vulnerable" ship will just sit happily in a POS, hence being quite "invulnerable" while still providing full goodness of its bonuses.

End result of killing small towers is usually another tower anchored in no time - they cost less then two tech 2 fitted cruisers these days.

Then again, trying to argue with you is not worth the effort. After all, I wouldn't expect a person who's average count on killmail is 30+ and most solo kills are done camping eggle gates in an arty loki (lemme guess, boosted?) to understand any argument being presented in this thread.
Xolve
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#28 - 2013-05-28 07:55:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Xolve
Garan Nardieu wrote:
End result of killing small towers is usually another tower anchored in no time - they cost less then two tech 2 fitted cruisers these days.


Because dropping another tower, even offline is just completely out of the question right? People would never dare to steep to such level of meta-gaming Roll


Garan Nardieu wrote:
Then again, trying to argue with you is not worth the effort. After all, I wouldn't expect a person who's average count on killmail is 30+ and most solo kills are done camping eggle gates in an arty loki (lemme guess, boosted?) to understand any argument being presented in this thread.


I'm in a small alliance, apparently we're pretty good at fleet PvP, even fighting near impossible odds that would make most people never even think of undocking. I'm not a solo PvPer and never claimed to be, I have no problems getting people to wreck towers with me though, just saying.

I'm rather curious as to how you can derive associated intellect from killboard statistics though- do explain.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#29 - 2013-05-28 07:56:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Koj 'Jok wrote:
I'm still pretty new, but it seems to me that Eve is all about risk=reward. If you want to plug a bunch of expensive implants in you will have an advantage over others, but you also have the risk of losing your pod and costing you a bunch of isk. If you want the advantage of a boost, you should have the risk of possibly losing the boosting ship.



My implant set is worth 3.5 billion isk. My OGB is worth 500m. The risk is on-grid.


Also, as for losing the booster, a leadership alt has a specific skillset and a long train to be effective. If you want to kill it, i dont see why you shouldnt have to use a probing alt with an equally narrow and focussed train. Perhaps make probing skills a little less intensive since they do seem to take a long time for the level V ones.

That said, im all for not allowing boosters to work from inside POS shields, though a couple of weeks ago, one of the very few times i did this saved my OGB during an open FW fleet where presumably a PL alt warped to the boosters during a POCO fight.

Damar Rocarion wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YTro3hBqdc - if i wasnt boosted would that have been a fair fight?


Yesterday I engaged two thrashers, algos, rifter and executioner in my non-boosted non-kiting hookbill and came on top. And just to prove a point, I later barged into a plex with same hookbill as it was guarded by two autocannon thrashers and forced both thrashers out (sadly a misclick costed me a killmail).

So perhaps that was skill or idiot-savant ability trait to do Eve related math. Many others use multiple OGB to be untouchable and think they are the hottest s.it around...


Good stuff. Though you are fighting brawlers with a nano ship, we all know how that ends. Im using boosts to warp in on, and fight, and sometimes pick of the weakest tanked nano ship in gangs of nano ships (though that video was just an example from yesterday, certainly not the best example).
Garan Nardieu
Super Serious Fight Club
#30 - 2013-05-28 08:15:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Garan Nardieu
Xolve wrote:
I'm in a small alliance

1888 members is considered a small aliance Shocked?

Xolve wrote:

I'm rather curious as to how you can derive associated intellect from killboard statistics though- do explain.

I never questioned your intellect, only your relevant experience on some of the arguments being presented in this thread (namely OGB's ruining solo/small gang gameplay). I understand that you don't care for real small/solo gameplay, but that doesn't make your arguments valid, only makes you look like one of those silly 'you play this game our way or no way at all' guys.
Then again, most of people from larger entities do tend to sound like that.

Quote:
, apparently we're pretty good at fleet PvP... I'm not a solo PvPer and never claimed to be...

Apparently your alliance is good at fleet PvP and you're not a soloer. Fine, but then you should stick to discussing in fleet combat threads with your arguments. I feel hat imbalance brought by OGB's is felt more by small gangs/soloers since large fleets will generally tend to both bring their boosts which will level the playfield anyway.

Quote:
I have no problems getting people to wreck towers with me though

Not everyone finds that interesting, I personally get a rash whenever we need to take out an iHub or small tower in fw, its that boring.
I know that game play around valuable moons and sov in null is different tho, I don't understand it and hence don't bother to post in related form threads. That's a good general principle for anyone imho - argue about what you're familiar with, learn about what you are not before you try arguing. Just saying.
Vizvig
Savage Blizzard
#31 - 2013-05-28 08:27:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Vizvig
700 pvpers online whine about ogb, 500 deal with it, 300 use it.

And another 50k of online do farming, and not knowed what is OGB and do not want to know.

Big problem right?

P.S. no proofBig smile
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#32 - 2013-05-28 08:30:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Garan Nardieu wrote:

I know that game play around valuable moons and sov in null is different tho, I don't understand it and hence don't bother to post in related form threads. That's a good general principle for anyone imho - argue about what you're familiar with, learn about what you are not before you try arguing. Just saying.


There there now, we are here to listen to you and help you through this. Yes, yes, its very unfair that because you are lazy, other people get advantages over you. Its ok now, its ok. Everythings going to be ok. Shhhhhhh, go to sleep now, go to sleep.

Also, you are arguing about boosts. The changes you want will effect everyone so its pretty weak to try and exclude people.

PS, forgot to mention. My OGB is also a perfect falcon pilot :p
Xolve
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#33 - 2013-05-28 08:44:45 UTC
Garan Nardieu wrote:
Xolve wrote:
I'm in a small alliance

1888 members is considered a small aliance Shocked?


It was sarcasm. You again- completely missed my point that the existence of OGB probably has more to do with the extra money it puts in CCP's pocket than anything; I just illustrated that it was a counterable tactic, and if you choose to do something about it or not, is entirely up to you.

I'm more of a smallish gang person myself, but I'm not going to let the oppurtunity to literally dunk several hundred people at a time pass me by; I get that a lot of you don't do the nullsec thing, and that's fine- Claiming that this is a 'play the game my way or not' card just says to me that you are yet ANOTHER in an endless squirming mass of unwashed morons that think solo pvp should be the bastion behind which CCP makes it's decisions.

Here's news for you friend- it wasn't ten years ago, it isn't today (that probably won't change).

If what you are looking for is challenging and engaging PvP either solo, or by small gang; it's out there you just have to dig for it. You're going to lose more than you kill, even the most accomplished of soloers have shown this true, time and time again. OGB are a crutch low-skilled PvPers use to try and make themselves appear better than they are. No amount of links can completely eliminate simple piloting errors otherwise experienced PvP pilots know to avoid/won't make.
Colt Blackhawk
Doomheim
#34 - 2013-05-28 08:48:17 UTC
Vizvig wrote:
700 pvpers online whine about ogb, 500 deal with it, 300 use it.

And another 50k of online do farming, and not knowed what is OGB and do not want to know.

Big problem right?

P.S. no proofBig smile


You simply don´t get it. It is a game breaking mechanic making whole weapon systems useless.
Drones are useless vs a fast loko boosted frig. Missiles in many cases too.
A loki boosted condor can kill a rapid light missile fitted not active tanked prophecy.

[09:04:53] Ashira Twilight > Plant the f****** amarr flag and s*** on their smoking wrecks.
Xolve
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#35 - 2013-05-28 08:59:12 UTC
Colt Blackhawk wrote:
A loki boosted condor can kill a rapid light missile fitted not active tanked prophecy.


Deserves to die.

You know what makes loki boosted condor pilots mad; like really, really mad?

Phased Muon Sensor Dampener. Targeting Range Script.


You're Welcome!
Damar Rocarion
Nasranite Watch
#36 - 2013-05-28 09:05:49 UTC
Xolve wrote:
You know what makes loki boosted condor pilots mad; like really, really mad?

Phased Muon Sensor Dampener. Targeting Range Script.



Not actually true as kiting condor more often than not has his own damp (or two) which will get a lock first and probably render other ships targeting range fairly irrelevant as the condor can kite from 40km off. But in theory it can work.
Xolve
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#37 - 2013-05-28 09:14:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Xolve
Damar Rocarion wrote:
Not actually true as kiting condor more often than not has his own damp (or two) which will get a lock first and probably render other ships targeting range fairly irrelevant as the condor can kite from 40km off. But in theory it can work.


It seemed more fitting and informative than 'Tonight's Headline- Big Ship dies to Small Ship while Support is nowhere to be found'. You gave an ambiguous example, I followed through with a ambiguous response.

We can sit here and play Paper, Rock, Scissors, Lizard, Spock all night, the result won't change. There is nothing inherently 'broken' about OGB, while some players might find it inconvenient or counter-intuitive to their preferred choice of aiming there pixels at other pixels and hoping the other pixels explode first. There are counters to POS'd up boosters being there in the first place, which pretty much equates to if it's there, and you can do something about it- yet you choose not to: It's your fault.

The main drawbacks to removing OGB is, it directly takes money away from CCP's bottom line (which is more important than yours, mine or anyone elses chosen playstyle), and changing it would affect the game in other ways that you nerds often overlook, say for example, do you honestly expect to find a Rorqual in a belt helping out his miner bros in Null? While I would meet such an occasion with joy, I don't think it will (or should) ever happen.

Instead of 'removing' OGB, they could just nerf T3 boosting into the ground (or even remove the damn subsystem), and make Command Ships actually have a purpose other than being an anchor for certain fleet doctrines.
Garan Nardieu
Super Serious Fight Club
#38 - 2013-05-28 09:57:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Garan Nardieu
Crosi Wesdo wrote:

There there now, we are here to listen to you and help you through this. Yes, yes, its very unfair that because you are lazy, other people get advantages over you. Its ok now, its ok. Everythings going to be ok. Shhhhhhh, go to sleep now, go to sleep.

Also, you are arguing about boosts. The changes you want will effect everyone so its pretty weak to try and exclude people.

PS, forgot to mention. My OGB is also a perfect falcon pilot :p


I have a falcon alt a perfect prober alt and soon will have a perfect booster alt too. I have several accounts for which I pay real money because I can afford it without problem, and I'm not whining because I'm lazy or don't understand the mechanics (seriously, what makes me lazy exactly - the fact that I find current trend of draggin OGBs everywhere in order to get into a fight a tedium?? *facepalm*). What I'm trying to to discuss is a poor gameplay design here, namely OGB tech 3 boosting which is extremely broken atm.


Xolve wrote:

The main drawbacks to removing OGB is, it directly takes money away from CCP's bottom line (which is more important than yours, mine or anyone elses chosen playstyle), and changing it would affect the game in other ways that you nerds often overlook, say for example, do you honestly expect to find a Rorqual in a belt helping out his miner bros in Null? While I would meet such an occasion with joy, I don't think it will (or should) ever happen.

Instead of 'removing' OGB, they could just nerf T3 boosting into the ground (or even remove the damn subsystem), and make Command Ships actually have a purpose other than being an anchor for certain fleet doctrines.


No I don't expect Rorqs in belts or out of poses ever but, y'know, they could just make this slight change of allowing OGB to function within POS shield only for industrial ships and prevent them from fitting combat boosting modules. A simple set of if-then's in code should do.

You seem to have confused what I was refering to the whole time since, in the end, we seem to pretty much agree on this topic. Again, I said that I find it silly that CCP nerfed tech 3's for explo (in Odyssey) and didn't do it for command subsytems because tech 3's as combat boosting ships are broken atm. I've posted in several threads on this topic before (on one of my alts tho Lol - here's an example) and proposed fairly simple to implement solutions (read them as and/or solutions):

- make command processors bloom sig size of ships they are fitted to (again, paritally solved in Odyssey)
- prevent tech 3's from fitting command processors (hence limiting them to just one command boost module)
- prevent tech 3's from boosting from POSes, allow industrials to do that (orcas, rorqs)
- nerf command boosts for tech 3's
etc.

but you know... CCP.
Dav Varan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#39 - 2013-05-28 10:20:42 UTC
You are not allowed to be competitive unless you have 2 accounts minimum.
Otherwise cccp would be poor.

1 solo warrior + 1 gank link booster = minimum spec for "solo" these days.
Shame because its a pain in the arse carrying a linky around on a roam.

Eve should get more solo "really solo" player friendly imho.
It would make it much more fun.

delete links and all gang bonuses.

Because you dont need 35% boosts on top of having Multiple v 1.
Irya Boone
The Scope
#40 - 2013-05-28 10:42:41 UTC
yeah need a Nerf of OGB , it's just insane OMS full of legions

but once you do that people Will whine about blue pill , when you nerf blue pill / drugs they will whine about something else to the day we will all fight in noob ships

CCP it's time to remove Off Grid Boost and Put Them on Killmail too, add Logi on killmails .... Open that damn door !!

you shall all bow and pray BoB