EVE Information Portal

Please stop. The plural of bonus is bonuses, not boni. The fact that you continue using it and edited your earlier post to reflect this just makes you look stupider.

Can not recall if I was No6 or No7, but yeah, I'll take a hit for team accept that sacrifice. Speaking of the underdog Cmd ship - with the shift in drone bandwidth for the myrmidon - what can you say about current drone bonuses for the Eos? Personally given the option between the Eos and a Command Co-Processor on a myrm, it is vertical undock 19/20.



Does that include the Rorqual?

Please say yes!

(1) Fleets are capped at a maximum of 250. For big null-sec battles, you do indeed need multiple identical boosters.

(2) Only a single ship/pilot's worth of boost can propagate to all 256 fleet members (well, 251, due to an annoying bug in the WC position). 5 further ship/pilot's worth of boost can propagate to 51 members each, and a bunch of pilots can give boosts to themselves and 9 others.

Now, you might claim that a single ship + mindlink can give all the boost that matters. That could be considered as an argument that said set of boosts is relatively overpowered (vs the other options), rather than a criticism of the hierarchical mechanics themselves.


That said, it might be interesting to disconnect gang-link (or even all) boosting and command. Consider a mechanic where any (and all, non-stacking) members of a squad provided their boosts to everyone on-grid (read "visible in 'everything' tab on overview") in the same squad. This would encourage spreading multiple boosting vessels throughout the fleet.

1. It is this vast because, well, the bonus handed out by T3 OGB ships which are to all intents and purposes unscannable, is so vast. 45% vast, in fact.

2.
a. I think it does make sense. Gallente get armour/info. They use armour tanking as their philosophy and face off against Caldari who use ECMs, so this strengthens them against their foes. Minmatar philosophy is fast shield kiting (well...as much as the mutable Minmatar have a tanking philosophy) so they get Skirmish and Siege. Caldari use ECM so they get Info links to increase their ECM optimal, strength and sensor integrity, and Siege links because of shield. Etcetera. These pairings are logical - CCP Fozzie's thoughtbubble about giving Gallente Skirmish would be good at making blaster boats more usable, but it would basically just turn into shield Astarte's.

b. I disagree. Maybe in w-space where it is all brawling at short ranges, dominated by T3 gangs with uber tank, logis and so on, this is true. However, in lowsec there is a greater use of Falcon alts, BB blobs and even ECM Drake blobs. This is a type of combat where sensor strength is key, and Info link utility is sorely, sorely needed. I would argue that pairing Armour/Info on an Eos and Shield/Info on a Vulture will see these ships proliferate in FW and lowsec fights, as you can now pair an Eos with a SFI gang, or a Vulture with a Drake gang, and avoid having a single Falcon 100% ruin your day. It will only be 50-75% chance of day ruinage.

c. This is an allegation predicated upon the OGB whiny Q.Q. IF you have trained all cruiser 5 and got into strat cruisers with WC4 and leadership skills so you can roll the whole suite of AFK boosting T3's, well, sucks to be you. Arguably you wasted 3 of the Cruiser 5 skills anyway as the 5 link Tengu fit everyone uses is pretty much de rigeur. In the end, maybe you should spend the time before this change hits in training BC5 and CS 5 on that toon (a sweet 80 days, plenty of time to spare) in order to convert your 4 racial Cruiser 5's into being across the Command Ships.

Oh, that's right. Aside from cloaking and being able to use ECCM's and moderate fitting skills, these alts you all have possess no gun, tanking or mobility skills at all because they were never intended to get shot at. So now we come to the crux of the problem, if it is indeed a problem, and that is that these toons all the anIs that in essence tears on behalf of an OGB booster alt? Om nom nom!

Now, as to these claims that OGB's are a leveller between small mobile/cloaky gangs and larger gangs (aka Nosirevbus's blather).

This is crap. Yes, cloaky T3/recon gangs gain benefits from having cloaky OGB booster alts, and Nosirevbus carries on at length about how they use their cloaking to control engagement parameters. Well, nerfing OGBs won't change that. unless I fell asleep and woke up playing Elite, your cloaky booster can uncloak on grid up to 500km away. Or more if you stretch the grid competently. This is far and away enough to allow you to maintain "control" of the situation. This then becomes a gripe about the nerf to bonus amount, and is in essence a complaint that cloaky T3/recon gangs only work via maintaining ridiculous range via 45% boosts and using faction dissys etc.

Is that the tears of an OGB booster alt? Om nom nom. You are engaging at 40-50km range with faction Dissy's in cloaky T3's only when you don't have ceptors on the field, or when you know you can DPS down the main gang so the ceptor is irrelevant. And since the latest T1 frigate patch, ceptors are worse than Condors with ASB setups anyway, so complaining a T3/recon cloaky gang is suddenly uncompetitive is bulldust, as T1 frigs these days are competitive. You might just have to wear a bit more risk and give up on engaging what you engaged before.

I am sure you can work out how to rewarp your cloaky booster T3 to the far side of the fleet, decloak it only when neccessary, and fight with its 2% boosts. You don't have to bring a fat slug of a Vulture or Damnation along (but they do make great bait!).

There is also a lot of whine about Mindlinks. Again, this is predicated upon people with OGB alts, who have been mainlined into being niche trained for a niche fit with a niche role, which is utterly safe from attack in any practical way, realising that you may as well drop 100M on a mindlnk because you'll never lose it. Now CCP expunges your niche by forcing your toons on-grid and the logic behind putting stupid implants in your head is gone, and...OMG, is that some OGB booster alt tears? Omnomnom.

Train Infomorph Psychology, mint a JC with Estal Arador, and roll a clean clone if you can't stomach a 2B pod loss. Everyone else does this - its not a problem with the availability of mindlinks or the fact to go Uber you will have to risk something in a CS.

HANDS OFF TYPHOON!
Before you give us Tech3 Battleships, the role of the Phoon is called "versatility".

I can't read through 32 pages of posts, but after reading through the first 5. I realized how stupid or perhaps simply obtuse CCP devs are. You seem to believe that the cruiser hull re-balance is complete. News flash for you: now that you have altered T1 generic T1 cruiser hulls, you have impacted the relative performance of umpteen T2 and faction cruiser hulls.

The fact that you are now moving on to BC's and BS's whole ignoring the balance of cruiser hulls does not surprise me, since I lost all faith in the CCP dev's common sense long ago.

Since there are battleships with 8 turrets, it'd be nice to have battleships with 8 launchers, too. Yeah cruise missiles suck, but it wouldn't hurt to have the raven with 8 of them, and the typhoon with 7

In an ideal world warfare links wouldn't exist at all, I don't see how it improves gameplay to have a single ship in a large fleet be significantly more powerful than a single ship on its own by virtue of the fleet having some dude's alt in an unkillable damnation or vulture. Are numbers not enough of an advantage or something? idgi. Maybe CCP just wants command ships to kill off small gang and solo for good

But of course CCP is stuck with their awful policy of not removing mechanics once implemented, no matter how bad they are for the game.

EDIT: But I like your idea if we're gonna be stuck with gang links, which evidently we are

Some interesting changes. However like many others i think ferox shouldnt be "sniper" but instead it should have rof or dmg bonus. Ive always hated that range bonus on turreted caldari boats like in blaster rokh for example.

Im not sure if i like carrier skill reduce idea or not. For me it would be nice as i have one carrier allready and support skills for it. So i could get another race carrier just by buying racial carrier skillbook without needing to train that racial BS to 5. On other hand i think capitals shouldnt be so "easy" to train.

Another thing which really wasnt related to that blog. Imho freighters are too easy to suicide gank in highsec atm. i think the main problem with highsec freighter ganks is these "new" tech 3 battlecruisers such as talos. Problem is that they are pretty cheap compared to BS and yet still they have 8 x large guns with nice dps and they can just melt freighters in easymode. Id like to see freighters EHP relooked to face these large guns from these cheap hulls. Before T3 battlecruisers people used BS's mostly i believe which would be kinda ok as BS's cost alot more. Alltho i think its good that we got rid of suicide gank insurance fraud thing.

All I see: NERF, NERF, NERF.

CCP wonna make some gallente ships as fast as matar ships.
Some amarr ships with same drone bonuses and bays as gallente ships.
Some matar ships woth same missile bonuses as caldari ships.

Sure, first I have to see changes. But atm all I think is 'WTF?'
Are you trying to make all ships same in use so dronelovers won't train gallente ships, speedy gonzalez won't look for matar ships and missilefans won't train caldari ships?
All in one? Nah... Imho, eve is becoming too easy.