Player Features and Ideas Discussion

So why boosting is so effecting?
Because it allows you to increase capabilities of your modules and ships.

Why it is so overpowered ?
Because when applied to large group of people : eg Fleets, it makes them much harder targets , at a very limited cost - eg 1-2 boosting ships , depending on skills.

I think links are fine , but only from small gang perspective.
Someone did spend a lot of time on training additional char , he have to run 2 accounts - this is good both from player and from CCP side.

Still the moment when 1 character is capable of boosting large amount of people , using off grid T3 cruiser full of links - things are going a bit out of balance.

What i propose will solve, or should i say , a bit normalize few things.

Base idea is very simple:
- remove wing and fleet command skills.

Refocus all leadership/link skills that they can only affect squad you are in command.

Very simple change that is balancing a bit :
- logistics in big fleets
- numbers in big fleets affected by links
- off grid links

How?
If links can only affect active squad then if we are using off-grid boosters , then usual 20-30 logistic in a fleet will require 4 dedicated boosting characters.
You want to provide links to all fleet members - you will have to delegate 25 boosting characters , and thats a lot of people, that will be off grid, usually 25 people that will be playing on 2 accounts , so most of them will die.

People will start to use command ships , but command ships are bit different than offgrid T3 cruisers.
Command ships cannot have almost 2 full sets of links , but only base provided for their class , as their slots are also needed for tank and utility modules.

At the same time, links for small groups, mining, ratting ... will be still unchanged, and functioning in almost the same way as they do now.

Well CCP nerfed refining, drone alloys , lot drops ... just to get more mining accounts.
So im guessing they will not remove links to loose all accounts linked only to this activity , and i more than few people who keep one of their accounts only because of the boosting provided to small gangs.

Oh I totally get why links are nice to have around from player and CCP perspective, I just question their "logic". On the other hand we have space with properties of fluid so...

I have 3 accounts just because I want to have my own linky for various stuff pvp/pve related stuff among other things. But I wouldn't even flinch if magic of links got removed and replaced with more reasonable mechanics. Wanna have bonuses? Somebody has to click around and actively keep to provide them. If that somebody is your alt, well tough luck - learn to click faster or prepare to loss mail for one of your ships.

And before somebody will cry "think about children!" I say frakk children, blob gonna blob either way by the sheer power of numbers and small gangs should know better how much they can bite. If links would be similar to remote reps small gangs could try to separate big fleet into smaller chunks an kill stranded ships who went outside of "linky" range. Same applies of course to small gang but nobody said guerrilla warfare is easy.

On grid boosting favors the big-blob... so... no thanks!

On-Grid boosters can already be neuted dry and thus their links shut down. Without Guardian Cap transfer or cap boosters, they are not viable - which in turn means either more workload for the Guardians or less tank for the booster pilot. Both is kind of fine, but more stress is really not needed.

Nothing changes except that boosting in itself becomes even less viable for a variety of applications. For instance, where is a cruiser sized booster that can keep up with shield hacs and has the necessary tank to not just end up alphaed of the field, not to mention the necessary speed? Or where is the compensation for Solo PVPers who can only outsmart fleets with their off-grid boosts in order to get the edge over the (small) blob? Their boosters are, coincidentally, already in grave danger as the pilot needs to concentrate on the PVP ship and can't keep an eye on the booster all the time, so the booster can be scanned down and tackled/killed with relative ease.

Why not make links more like 'remote sensor boosters'?

Make links targeted remote boosting with command ships having to lock you up just like logistics have to to boost you.

Puts links on the field, puts them in danger, booster needs to choose to turn her / his guns on someone or drop target lock to boost a mate.

I think it makes far more sense in EVE than in an RPG environment...
The links (and related gear) use crazy amounts of CPU because they're receiving telemetry from every ship they're boosting, in the same way as a car driving in circles in Japan can be optimised by a bunch of guys sitting in Milton Keynes the engineers and the capsuleer with all this information is able to see adjustments which might be made to improve performance. "Gold Three; I'm detecting resonant frequencies in your shield emitters, adjust cycle to Four-A and purge by sections."

I used to think that boosts were overpowered and believe that boosts should be taken on grid, but i don't think that it's really fair to players who have invested in boosting characters. I think that a better solution to the OP's perceived problem is to provide pilots without a particular resource an option, that while it might not be quite as good as the asset it's derived from, still does something to fill the gap.

I've mentioned a few times that I think that the idea behind the bastion module should be expanded; to be more precise it's the idea that a pilot forfeits the ability to be remotely assisted in exchange for powerful benefits. In my mind, all remote assistance, including command boosts, would be removed. Since most remote assistance provides powerful boosts to specific attributes, this module would provide moderate but global boosts to ship attributes.

If it were to take the form of a replacement for damage controls, for instance, most ships would be able to fit it easily. Solo and small gang players would have an option that wouldn't obsolete remote assistance or command bonuses, but instead provide players with an edge that doesn't scale well with increasing gang size.

I'm not providing specifics here, so maybe the idea isn't helpful to the discussion, but its an idea I'd like to see expanded upon. The nature of generalization vs. specificity and tradeoff is so inherent to EVE that I feel like this idea fits the spirit of the game well and would encourage a renaissance of small player, small scale, and inexperienced player action.

Dislike most changes to boosting but I think that ganglinks should give a bonus to those that have their **** together and moving boosting to squad down only would further help to separate those who are half organised from those who aren't - also has a knock on effect of tending to bring links on grid for bigger fleets as its less hassle than dealing with half a dozen off grid boosters rather than just having 1 guy keeping half an eye on his semi-safe boosting alt.

The only change I'd really advocate in the short term though would be the ability to see if someone is receiving command boosts or not so as to be able to make a better educated decision going into a fight.

So does everything. Numbers win as long as logi stays as it is. Once/if logi is sorted out, a smaller blob can certainly blap the other side's booster too.