These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

offgrid boosts

Author
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#21 - 2015-11-30 22:14:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Markus Reese
Rowells wrote:

I don't think CCP has mentioned changing any attributes or stats. So far I've only heard that off grid is gone. Not sure if it's necessary to change the stats atm. At least not until the meta settles.


The ships themselves, you are right. They have not mentioned anything, but this was also true with logi changes. When being finalized, we got changes to the logi ships attributes and other parts as well in addition to falloff.

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#22 - 2015-11-30 22:36:40 UTC
Markus Reese wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
The tears will flow..
Remove links entirely. Everyone is on equal footing then. You can claim the small gang needs them to fight the big gang. You dont. You use strategy and misdirection. Ive been soloing without links for a few years now without much issue. Ive killed people who were linked, when i was not. Ive out manuevered and killed gangs of 15-20:1 without links.

People are just too scared to commit and be innovative in their fits/fleets/doctrines.

Im glad OGB are being dumpstered, its been a long time coming.


So why remove the links all together though. If it is a counterable and vulnerable force multiplier, is that not good? Like you said yourself, it can affect, but it does not in the whole make or break a fight. Eve combat is kinda unique in that there are lots of things that give players an edge. the OGB is just an issue with things like sitting outside a pos and the like. While counterable, it is still disengaging combat. That is my issue. Not that it is some magic invincible, but it is disengaged.

I loved on grid boosting and the evasive flight tactics and positioning needed to keep alive...

http://i.imgur.com/XO9CfoP.jpg


OGB in their current state are damn near immune to risk. EVE is built on risk vs reward. Yet you can have a 6 link tengu follow around your svipul in LS and hug a gate or station for total immunity. Or make it where you have to invest in an HG virtue set just to probe one down in nul. Not to mention being nullified and cloaky so it can dodge gate camps too.

You park your booster and go use your cancer of choice (svipul, garmur, orthrus, gila etc) and you have an almost risk free way of pvping. Its not "just" the boosters i have issue with. Its the combination of links, HG implants and drugs that really make for rediculous scenarios. Like 11k/s garmurs or 4.5k/s gilas. Anyone can buy and plug in a set of implants or pop some pills. For links though you need a dedicated account pushing this out of the realm of a casual player.

Thats what is needed are more casual players, going out and experiencing pvp and learning the mechanics. Not be forced to feel like they NEED links to compete against all the elite lowsec pvp tryhards. Who think they're awesome because they have a 2nd account that does nothing but boost 1 ship. We make that ease of access easier and more pvp will come naturally.

In the case of fleets, every fleet has their own links. Hell when i lived in null our self defense fleet had links. Saying you need links to take on another fleet is silly. That other fleet has the same links you do. Removing links would make zero difference in what you do now, and what you do then. Both parties are on equal footing. If you really need to sig tank, pop that pill that reduces sig radius :)
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#23 - 2015-11-30 23:02:51 UTC
Markus Reese wrote:
Rowells wrote:

I don't think CCP has mentioned changing any attributes or stats. So far I've only heard that off grid is gone. Not sure if it's necessary to change the stats atm. At least not until the meta settles.


The ships themselves, you are right. They have not mentioned anything, but this was also true with logi changes. When being finalized, we got changes to the logi ships attributes and other parts as well in addition to falloff.

Are you referring to the optimal and falloff bonuses? I think we're changed as a result of the changed modules, otherwise the bonuses would have been out of wack (tiny optimal bonus for shield falloff makes little sense).

They aren't changing any stats, just locations. I wouldn't expect any changes alongside the grid changes.
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#24 - 2015-11-30 23:11:13 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Markus Reese wrote:
Rowells wrote:

I don't think CCP has mentioned changing any attributes or stats. So far I've only heard that off grid is gone. Not sure if it's necessary to change the stats atm. At least not until the meta settles.


The ships themselves, you are right. They have not mentioned anything, but this was also true with logi changes. When being finalized, we got changes to the logi ships attributes and other parts as well in addition to falloff.

Are you referring to the optimal and falloff bonuses? I think we're changed as a result of the changed modules, otherwise the bonuses would have been out of wack (tiny optimal bonus for shield falloff makes little sense).

They aren't changing any stats, just locations. I wouldn't expect any changes alongside the grid changes.


Weren't fittings tweaked as well? Guess I need to re-read, but the point is that all CCP has said is that OGB changes are in the works and they are looking at making it AoE. Very vague. They might just change the warfare links to an area, or they might change everything and give us command battleships for high tank environments.

Main point I was stating is that due to the sheer lack of info, the direction of this topic would better be suited as to how to make on grid, and being and on grid pilot just an awesome role. Something that serious and focused players need only apply for instead of just a background alt on a side monitor.

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#25 - 2015-11-30 23:44:34 UTC
I usually fly with an on-grid boosting Claymore, so I cannot wait for off-grid boosting to go away. That will be a very welcome change. It also means I won't have to cart around my Virtue set account to chase people's OGB away.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

The Ginger Sith
Attero Industries
#26 - 2015-12-01 00:11:09 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
The Ginger Sith wrote:
Markus Reese wrote:
Point of this is that they lose say the 4500 accounts but gain 9000 single account holders?


made up stats are funny (and i am referring to both original poster and yours)




And yours as well, I assume?



actually i was going by the trends very few new players stick around from any of the major influxes and i used to FC incursions and hunt in wormholes so speaking from experience that there are just as many pve OGB's as pvp ones and i rarely saw OGB's in pvp when i lived in null and i always ran my command ship on grid shooting and tackling stuff.
SurrenderMonkey
The Exchange Collective
Solyaris Chtonium
#27 - 2015-12-01 01:25:07 UTC
The Ginger Sith wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
The Ginger Sith wrote:
Markus Reese wrote:
Point of this is that they lose say the 4500 accounts but gain 9000 single account holders?


made up stats are funny (and i am referring to both original poster and yours)




And yours as well, I assume?



actually i was going by the trends very few new players stick around from any of the major influxes and i used to FC incursions and hunt in wormholes so speaking from experience that there are just as many pve OGB's as pvp ones and i rarely saw OGB's in pvp when i lived in null and i always ran my command ship on grid shooting and tackling stuff.



Cool.

Show your work.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#28 - 2015-12-01 01:38:50 UTC
Not sure how we made a connection, but if new players dont stick, is proof they are bored. I used to FC incursions as well. One of the first fcs and ran some of the largest fleets during the live events. To this day people from back then see me in channels and start a convo to say hi.

The game mechanics only go so far. It is up to us to make sure it is a rewarding experience

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#29 - 2015-12-01 01:56:31 UTC
Removing off grid boosts won't hurt their income. If anything, it will improve their income, now that people can't basically pay to win and cheat at 1v1 fights.

Lowsec, for example, becomes much more new player friendly.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#30 - 2015-12-01 02:17:15 UTC
Ncc 1709 wrote:
Removing off grid boosts will be bad for ccp's income.
personaly i run 3 off grid boost toons, which is 3 accounts paid for each month.

remove the offgrid functionalty, and why would i need them anymore?
it restricts where i will want to fight, so i wont bother fighting else where.
i dont even see any point to keeping them subbed if i have to move them every where to benefit from them.
so that would make it 3 less paid for accounts per month, from me alone.

now if every corporation in null runs a similar setup, thats 1500 corps no longer using 3 accounts per system each.

so 4500 unsubbed accounts, just from removing off grid boosts.

plus less people will be willing to fight without boosts, so less content, less happy pvper's, more people unsub.

way to kill the game with such a simple change.

so please reconcider the removal of offgrid boosts. we have had them for many years, with few issues, why change them now?


Not to sound rude, but what this says to me is
"I have more money to spend on Eve, therefore I should have a distinct advantage over those will less real world income."

Seriously, you're saying that because you can afford and/or have more time to spend earning ISK to PLEX your account, you should be better taken care of by CCP.
That is fundamentally against the design intent of Eve.

OGB 1 player to overpower another without representation, out playing/fitting, and allows a player with more personal wealth and/or free time.
Eve allows a player to potentially overpower you with a less powerful ship based on piloting skill (in some cases).
If you wish to pilot a second ship at the same time, then it either needs to be uninvolved with the fight/a small factor or you need to have the skill to be able to manage two ships actively involved in the fight.
Leonardo Adami
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#31 - 2015-12-01 03:31:13 UTC
Markus Reese wrote:
Leonardo Adami wrote:
I don't think they're doing enough. They need to either remove all boost or make it so the booster has to target specific people to apply boost imo.

I feel removing ogb only helps make the blob stronger and doesn't help small roaming gangs at all.

If they didn't want to remove boost they could keep the non specialist leadership skills that allow the fleet to receive a small boost whole you're on grid and in fleet. Then rework the attribute systems so that the attributes give a small boost to specific stats if you're mapped a certain way. Then they could allow up to say four remaps a year. This would keep some level of leadership skill useful. Still require you to be in fleet and on grid. It'll also add some flavor to the attribute systems.


CCP has mentioned the intention of removing attribute implants. Perhaps leadership or other boosting implants help.

For small gang, having a good command pilot is a bonus once OGB is gone. I flew T2 and T1 command fit ships small gang, and it was make or break. Mentality is a part of it. For an on grid booster, survival and fleet support is your focus, not killmails and damage. I would heavy tank, focus on positioning to force the targets out of position if they wanted to get me, etc. Since commands are active modules, it also means they can be neuted out.

The concept CCP stated was to make commands an AoE which also means supplimental command ships are easier, making it potentially harder to break the chain. In addition, they said they were looking at debuff style warfare links. Either way, combined with large grids, I really cannot find anything disadvantageous from a gameplay perspective. Most people forget that a battlecruiser can fit a warfare link. In my first forays into pvp, I flew a command link drake with my friends. When sansha incursions started, it was a prophecy. With drifters, I plan the same once the ogb is done.

If people cannot use an alt for combat, that means combat has become more engaging. More engaging means more subs. Want proof?

http://img3.mmo.mmo4arab.com/lol/2014/09/18/league_of_legends_2014_world_championship_620.jpg

Instant gratification is a beautiful thing. When there is meaning to a win and loss, it becomes more important to the player. Eve is in an extremely unique position of executed right.

We have a wide striation of ships. Stuff from newb to the supercaps. If all have relevance in a fight, that means instant gratification, but also goals to work for. The composition and makeup of a fleet should be pyramidal. With many at the bottom, and a few at the top. This allows all to get in on the action, but at the same time, roles to shoot for. That does not exist in eve. Eve is a puddle for composition. Here is the one ship doctrine and done. Train X and Y and then you can fly with us instead of tiered training.

So anything that puts onus on the players is good. It puts goals and incentive on newbs, and puts incentive on veterans to include them as foot soldiers. Pawns on the chessboard. Instead, we have tokens on a checkerboard right now.


I can appreciate your viewpoint but nothing you stated makes me think my previous opinions are invalid. Also the only really viable ship I can think of for kiting gangs facing large gangs is an arty sleipnir maybe claymore/astarte the others will all be so slow they'll get blobbed and killed.

When I was talking abut attributes I wasn't talking about implants I was talking the pilots actual attributes.
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#32 - 2015-12-01 03:52:47 UTC
Leonardo Adami wrote:

I can appreciate your viewpoint but nothing you stated makes me think my previous opinions are invalid. Also the only really viable ship I can think of for kiting gangs facing large gangs is an arty sleipnir maybe claymore/astarte the others will all be so slow they'll get blobbed and killed.

When I was talking abut attributes I wasn't talking about implants I was talking the pilots actual attributes.

Ahh, I misunderstood you, sorry about that, but I think I get what you mean.

The combat of small ambusher gangs taking out larger fleets. At current, having the hidden mobile off grid booster is the only way to get the advantage. Battlecruisers are kind of a pain to kite with. Not to mention reducing the mobility of the fleet on the whole.

Remember though, we do have the command dessies coming out as well, they are quite fast, though a little pricey for a more low cost cheap roaming fleet and will be in a hazard situation. Also will probably only be offering the one boost as to prevent gimping the fit too much. Still, no reason why a person cannot fit the rapid deployment then have a second ship to fit interdiction maneuvers. The jump drive has potential for kiting fleets as well as it can permit you to essentially cherry pick and yoink ships away from other threats.

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Shallanna Yassavi
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#33 - 2015-12-01 03:55:21 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Ncc 1709 wrote:
Removing off grid boosts will be bad for ccp's income.
personaly i run 3 off grid boost toons, which is 3 accounts paid for each month.

remove the offgrid functionalty, and why would i need them anymore?
it restricts where i will want to fight, so i wont bother fighting else where.
i dont even see any point to keeping them subbed if i have to move them every where to benefit from them.
so that would make it 3 less paid for accounts per month, from me alone.

now if every corporation in null runs a similar setup, thats 1500 corps no longer using 3 accounts per system each.

so 4500 unsubbed accounts, just from removing off grid boosts.

plus less people will be willing to fight without boosts, so less content, less happy pvper's, more people unsub.

way to kill the game with such a simple change.

so please reconcider the removal of offgrid boosts. we have had them for many years, with few issues, why change them now?


Not to sound rude, but what this says to me is
"I have more money to spend on Eve, therefore I should have a distinct advantage over those will less real world income."

Seriously, you're saying that because you can afford and/or have more time to spend earning ISK to PLEX your account, you should be better taken care of by CCP.
That is fundamentally against the design intent of Eve.

OGB 1 player to overpower another without representation, out playing/fitting, and allows a player with more personal wealth and/or free time.
Eve allows a player to potentially overpower you with a less powerful ship based on piloting skill (in some cases).
If you wish to pilot a second ship at the same time, then it either needs to be uninvolved with the fight/a small factor or you need to have the skill to be able to manage two ships actively involved in the fight.


That's not just off-grid-booster. An incomplete list:
Cyno alts
Scout alts
Region trader alts
Triple-web alts
Multibox mining, missions, incursions
Industry and research. If one PI alt can plex two accounts for a couple of hours per month (from that Plex hit 1B thread)... 10 PI alts can finance a small to medium-sized war and plex themselves?

You name it, there's some way a second account+client will help you a lot, and it's used to sell those sidekick accounts. Most of these aren't going to be changed, because it makes little to no business sense under the current business model.

If EVE were to go F2P, every one of those would have to be looked at and mitigated-much preferably without paywalls-or much of the game would just shatter.

A signature :o

Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#34 - 2015-12-01 04:13:36 UTC
Shallanna YassaviThat's not just off-grid-booster. An incomplete list:
Cyno alts
Scout alts
Region trader alts
Triple-web alts
Multibox mining, missions, incursions
Industry and research. If one PI alt can plex two accounts for a couple of hours per month (from that Plex hit 1B thread)... 10 PI alts can finance a small to medium-sized war [i wrote:
and[/i] plex themselves?

You name it, there's some way a second account+client will help you a lot, and it's used to sell those sidekick accounts. Most of these aren't going to be changed, because it makes little to no business sense under the current business model.

If EVE were to go F2P, every one of those would have to be looked at and mitigated-much preferably without paywalls-or much of the game would just shatter.


The issue comes down to when is multiboxing just increasing your own productivity vs detracting from gameplay. Also, must consider the meaning of certain things from a new player and gameplay perspective. Will go along with your examples there. All good ones.

1. Cyno alts-this is the prime example of redundancy in eve. Yes, are needed for cap movements efficiently, but before fatigue changes, it was to the point where I was getting hazed for not having one. My caps cannot move unless I am in a group, and each cyno is at my own risk and I understand it. However, cap warfare really wouldn't function well without it. As a player, who wants to be stuck sitting in an assured to die and stuck frozen beacon in space. Has to be a better way, but for now, I would be hard pressed to hold fault with having a cyno alt.

2. Scout alts. This one is not quite good gameplay. Yeah, people do it but I have been in and heard more than a fair share of stories of ops blown because the person looked away from scout alt to move main, only to miss critical intel of a cyno showing up or a fleet jumping through gate, etc. Paranoia is the main reason that scout alts exist. Fair fair, solo moving through pirate space, but at the same time, it is doable without scouts. I used to do it all the time.

3. Region trader alts. Same as cyno alts. I mean it does what it does. Doing it without is pure tedium and contains absolutely no real value. If I did business, you bet I would get tired jumping back and forth between main hub regions time and time again.

4. Triple webber alts. This is a product of our own making. Veterans worried about killboards etc. and as such, are not getting disposable newbies to have fun and get into eve doing tackle. Only way to get around this is a more involved combat system in which case multiboxing will just be a weakness to you.

5. Mining and missioning? Well the player's loss (fun wise) by not including others in what you do. Yeah, you made more isk, but when I can have a kick ass time with four other friends, all in mauraders running level four missions just to hang out and be friends? I win out overall. Once more though, a product of underdeveloped mechanics that makes this doable.

6. Industry and research. Like trading, no real way around it. I mean you start it and wait. If that is where majority of your SP lies, what is there to do but to change to another character to do something else, even if it is rotating characters so you are continually researching and industry.


Overall, it is a common thread, and one that OGB fits into. Uninvolved gameplay. Some things, such as trading and industry, is a tough one to work around. Others, desperately need updating. Either way, uninvolved gameplay does not attract or retain players. I mean multiboxing is the way to get a more fulfilling experience. As such, whenever something is changed to make it involved enough so it cannot be multibox, that is a win provided it is gameplay, and not just tedium (aka minigaming)

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#35 - 2015-12-01 07:17:27 UTC
Shallanna Yassavi wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
Ncc 1709 wrote:
Removing off grid boosts will be bad for ccp's income.
personaly i run 3 off grid boost toons, which is 3 accounts paid for each month.

remove the offgrid functionalty, and why would i need them anymore?
it restricts where i will want to fight, so i wont bother fighting else where.
i dont even see any point to keeping them subbed if i have to move them every where to benefit from them.
so that would make it 3 less paid for accounts per month, from me alone.

now if every corporation in null runs a similar setup, thats 1500 corps no longer using 3 accounts per system each.

so 4500 unsubbed accounts, just from removing off grid boosts.

plus less people will be willing to fight without boosts, so less content, less happy pvper's, more people unsub.

way to kill the game with such a simple change.

so please reconcider the removal of offgrid boosts. we have had them for many years, with few issues, why change them now?


Not to sound rude, but what this says to me is
"I have more money to spend on Eve, therefore I should have a distinct advantage over those will less real world income."

Seriously, you're saying that because you can afford and/or have more time to spend earning ISK to PLEX your account, you should be better taken care of by CCP.
That is fundamentally against the design intent of Eve.

OGB 1 player to overpower another without representation, out playing/fitting, and allows a player with more personal wealth and/or free time.
Eve allows a player to potentially overpower you with a less powerful ship based on piloting skill (in some cases).
If you wish to pilot a second ship at the same time, then it either needs to be uninvolved with the fight/a small factor or you need to have the skill to be able to manage two ships actively involved in the fight.


That's not just off-grid-booster. An incomplete list:
Cyno alts
Scout alts
Region trader alts
Triple-web alts
Multibox mining, missions, incursions
Industry and research. If one PI alt can plex two accounts for a couple of hours per month (from that Plex hit 1B thread)... 10 PI alts can finance a small to medium-sized war and plex themselves?

You name it, there's some way a second account+client will help you a lot, and it's used to sell those sidekick accounts. Most of these aren't going to be changed, because it makes little to no business sense under the current business model.

If EVE were to go F2P, every one of those would have to be looked at and mitigated-much preferably without paywalls-or much of the game would just shatter.


All the things you listed are not the same as OGB alts.
Sure, all of these aspects can give you an edge over your competition via ISK acquisition rates and/or safety in ISO generating activities.
However, it does not give you a direct pvp advantage.

You can have 12 toons mining all day long to supply your pvp toon, however, it does not provide you with piloting skills or SP.
That said, you can bring in a relatively safe OGB alt and be given a distinct advantage.
Now, if you were forced to bring that toon on grid and maintain both toons at once, it would provide the single toon/solo player with a means to counteract your advantage through piloting skills and/or your inability to maintain both toons.

Sure,'some people may drop their boosting account if this were done, but odds are,'most players would probably use them for other means of game activity.
Madd Adda
#36 - 2015-12-01 07:29:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Madd Adda
i don't mind the removal of ogb used for pvp, but only on two conditions:
1.the passive effect of skills that impact fleet members while they are in fleet, such as leadership, continue to be offgrid
2. links that don't improve defensive/offensive/pvp support capability remain offgrid.

Carebear extraordinaire

afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#37 - 2015-12-01 07:39:48 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Removing off grid boosts won't hurt their income. If anything, it will improve their income, now that people can't basically pay to win and cheat at 1v1 fights.

Lowsec, for example, becomes much more new player friendly.



Much less than you'd hope, certainly outside of small/novice fw.

"Because of falcon" will make a resurgence. I'd lay money on it.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#38 - 2015-12-01 07:44:41 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Removing off grid boosts won't hurt their income. If anything, it will improve their income, now that people can't basically pay to win and cheat at 1v1 fights.

Lowsec, for example, becomes much more new player friendly.



Much less than you'd hope, certainly outside of small/novice fw.

"Because of falcon" will make a resurgence. I'd lay money on it.


Faction warfare really is one of the best places to stick a newbean, however. Seriously, being in one by default should be an option for character creation.

Accessible individual income to recoup losses, good chance of action, and a relatively friendly community so long as you don't choose Gallente. It is the perfect way to get new players into the game.

And yeah, while people might just swap to Falcons in order to game 1v1 fights, at least that ****** is on the field where you can take a crack at him, not cloaked up fifty AU at the bottom of the system providing his unknowable boosts.

It's still a far better situation than we have now. Idk about you, but anyone I pick up anymore is getting pointed right to FW again, moreso now that Brave is basically dead.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#39 - 2015-12-01 08:02:17 UTC
Yeah it'll help, it's just not as much as one would hope. The rook might see a spike too, with the dscan immunity you'll not see it coming, it's a fightier hull and there's no recalibration delay.

I liked FW, in terms of alternates PH are decent atm, good content good fights. Well, were. Not sure about them right now if they are evaccing or not. They had a lot of fun up in CR though. EUNI still bounce fleets around near me right now.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#40 - 2015-12-01 08:16:49 UTC
Eh, baby steps I guess. They still have a ways to go to make PvP more accessible, but this is a step in the right direction. If they deploy this at the same time as the citadels we might see more impact.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.