These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Decreasing the use of off Grid Boosters
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
vikari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1 - 2013-07-19 00:10:40 UTC
Basically I'd like to see boosts to fleets served a lot more by on grid boosters. It isn't just being in a safe spot, boosters are often a POS. Titans are a perfect example. If someone has a defensive fleet up in their sov and a titan is there, it is completely reasonable to see them use their massive bonus to give their fleets a solid bonus, with minimal risk.

The solution I recommend is to have diminishing effects when off grid from the booster. Reduction of 50% of the bonus will make bringing the ship out to the field much more rewarding. This probably isn't enough to get a titan out of a POS, but I doubt any reduction of the bonus would be, they'd simple stop using them.

Criticism welcome
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#2 - 2013-07-19 01:26:35 UTC
The DEVs are already working hard to make warfare links affect only what's on field/grid (much to the mouth frothing hatred of some). If I recall correctly, all they need to do right now is optimize the code so the server doesn't have a seizure with more than 2 people on grid.

How did you Veterans start?
Viribus
Aurora.
The Initiative.
#3 - 2013-07-19 01:31:44 UTC
Just make the bonuses from warfare links so small that they're only worth using in large fleets

Links are broken as hell whether they're on grid or off

watch me be a scurb and get owned
SFM Hobb3s
Perkone
Caldari State
#4 - 2013-07-19 02:31:53 UTC
Kill Sh---Stuff faster? Win.
Sigras
Conglomo
#5 - 2013-07-19 09:34:25 UTC
What if, instead of a flat reduction of 50% you had a falloff of say 1 AU. IE the links would have 100% effect if on grid, 50% effectiveness if 1 AU away 0% effective 2 AU away

That way, the defender could still use homefield advantage if he has multiple POSs around, but the attacker could mitigate this by choosing where to fight, or putting drag bubbles up.
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#6 - 2013-07-19 09:39:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Little Dragon Khamez
Sigras wrote:
What if, instead of a flat reduction of 50% you had a falloff of say 1 AU. IE the links would have 100% effect if on grid, 50% effectiveness if 1 AU away 0% effective 2 AU away

That way, the defender could still use homefield advantage if he has multiple POSs around, but the attacker could mitigate this by choosing where to fight, or putting drag bubbles up.


I like that idea distance should certainly be a factor in boosting. I also think that there should be a countermeasure to OGB such as the ability to take a command ship and fit it with disruption modules that interfere with enemy warfare links such as jamming the airwaves within a certain distance with static etc, obviously kinks need to be worked out as to ensure that they only affect a designated enemy fleet as opposed to everyone in system, but I don't think it's an unreasonable idea.

You could have your own Off Grid Unbooster then.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
monkfish1234
State War Academy
Caldari State
#7 - 2013-07-19 09:41:40 UTC
this idea would only add to the issues that are currently stopping a ranged based system being introduced just for basic on/off boosting.

any sort of range check is a load on servers. when you are doing it for 1000+ people in one system every second things get bogged down really quickly and it causes the hamsters to go on strike.
Dilium
Screaming Hayabusa
#8 - 2013-07-19 10:52:56 UTC
As already mentioned, a final solution on the OGB problem is being worked on.

Problem is it will take time, possibly alot of it.

However the amounts "soloers" sporting linkalts is so big that i think alot of us would welcome a quickfix of some sort, until the developers have figured out how to force them ongrid(or whatever the plan is to fix them) in a way the servers can handle.

I would go as far as saying do what you need to make them less viable, reimburse leadership skills if you have to. Problem will only get bigger by the time as more and more obtain the SP needed to use them.

Then, when servers can handle the changes CCP has planned for them, make them viable again.
Quake590
Neurotoxin Control
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
#9 - 2013-07-19 11:06:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Quake590
A few nice ideas in here, diminishing returns in particular are a great concept, easy to implement and successful in what they promise. Unfortunately, there are two key issues with the removal of OGB.

First: CCP has said they will remove them(TM), my money's on 2-4 years :P

Second: The solution to the overuse/abuse of links is not to make them only usable on grid, it solves part of the issue but a new one arises. For even fights then OGB is an option, even if a skill intensive one (probably used for dualboxing brawlers) and when you end up in an uneven fight, the advantage of links reverses. Instead of the small gang having links and the large gang either being even or linkless, then only the large gang does, leading to a force multiplier on behalf of what is already a one sided fight.

This issue is compounded by the prevalence of large gang brawlers and small gang kiters, when the brawler has the range bonus and the kiter doesn't, then the kiter loses the option to kite and is likely to be out-tanked while brawling.

I say bring on the interesting solutions rather than considering the removal of OGB to be the "holy grail" of patches. Time to brace myself for the linkslut accusations....