These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Warfare links (off grid) nerf
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
m0cking bird
Doomheim
#1 - 2011-10-23 15:32:42 UTC
When will warfare links be limited? Maybe give them a range limitation like 100km (or anywhere on grid) to project bonuses.
Goose99
#2 - 2011-10-23 15:37:07 UTC
Yeah, blame the links. U mad bro?Cool
TrollFace TrololMcFluf
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#3 - 2011-10-23 15:38:12 UTC
Dont like being in a unfair fight do we

Do you think life should be fair for everyone

Well it bloody isnt so why should eve be fair

Someone somewhere will have a advantage over you

So you can either adapt or die you chose number two and three

Die and cry
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#4 - 2011-10-23 16:28:02 UTC
I have to aggre with the OP on having bonuses while you are there to analyze them but i think it has to do with how those bonuses are checked for. Also 500km diameter bonus buff.

However I would like to see off grid warfare improved like Long range bombardment units that requires a foward target painter to tag targets. A small squadron could then fly off and go find the bombarding ships. However I think this can run into a bad idea phase with alot of numbers involved there are ways to balance it but without actually

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.
m0cking bird
Doomheim
#5 - 2011-10-24 01:16:48 UTC  |  Edited by: m0cking bird
Goose99 wrote:
Yeah, blame the links. U mad bro?Cool



I'm always mad and I'm not your bro. BRA!
el alasar
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2011-10-27 19:52:50 UTC
300km radius seems reasonable? the link ship should be in range to perform the coordination... no?

check the moderated 10000 papercuts evelopedia page! http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Little_things_and_ideas_-_low_hanging_fruit_-_10000_papercuts comment, bump(!) and like what you like
Quark Valhala
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#7 - 2011-10-27 20:42:31 UTC
Get your own boosting vulture for your drakes.
And what about when you split up gang for tackle on different gates.
Thou cloaky nullified t3 commandlinked should be needed.
Actualy just cloaky nulifed shouldnt be able to fit together unless the ships aligns like a bs.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#8 - 2011-10-27 21:34:02 UTC
Agreed. Buffs should be limited to on grid for both mining and combat.

If you're not willing to be on grid during the fight, then don't get in the fight.

I can't do damage to off grid targets, so no buffing of off grid players.

If you wanna camp gates and get buffs, then bring your own boosters.

After all, you do have wing and squad boosters.
King Rothgar
Deadly Solutions
#9 - 2011-10-27 21:46:41 UTC
Not supported, no reason to limit them to on grid now that they are probable (a corp mate lost a link ship a few days ago to probers). As for interdiction nullifier + cloak, I can see why many would want that possibility removed. I however have a counter proposal, anchored bubbles make gate camping far too easy. Let's delete those instead.Cool

[u]Fireworks and snowballs are great, but what I really want is a corpse launcher.[/u]
paritybit
Stimulus
#10 - 2011-10-27 22:02:20 UTC  |  Edited by: paritybit
There is a topic about this in the Assembly Hall. Coincidentally, I made it.

My contention is that anything affecting your on-grid combat should be directly vulnerable to your on-grid resources. This is currently the case with all other modules that affect combat. It is also the case with fighters that have been assigned from a carrier -- though the carrier may not be vulnerable, the fighters can be destroyed.

Some of the arguments are "no u" as you're seeing here. Some of them relate to grids being stretchy which your use of a range rather than "grid" counters quite well. And some people just like things the way they are.

Anyway, I agree with you.