These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

Why We Should Support Off Grid Boosting

Author
Benjen Gelade
Doomheim
#1 - 2013-06-20 14:52:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Benjen Gelade
Greetings

Firstly, thank you for clicking on my thread. It is very important that everyone reads this and understands the situation.

I fully support the existence of off grid boosting. The reasons for this are many, but I have tried to summarise the main arguments below.

The Mining Argument

In EVE it is not convenient for miners to use mining boosts on grid. The only way for them to mine properly is for them to have a Rorqual provide boosts, at zero risk, from inside POS shields. It is totally unreasonable to ask them to risk in game assets. Everybody in the know agrees on this.

As OGB must remain for mining purposes, it therefore must remain for combat purposes. The reason for this is because CCP cannot code a new 'role bonus' for the Rorqual, allowing it to be the only ship that can provide system wide links, and only for mining links.

The 'Really Difficult to Program' Argument

It is very common for a competitive game to contain a 'broken' or 'overpowered' element from time to time. Typically, upon detecting such an element, game developers disable the element completely until it can be corrected. However this is not appropriate for OGB. The reason for this is because it is actually really difficult for the CCP programmers to fix OGB and will take them a very, very long time. As it will take such a long time, rather than disable the mechanism, it is far better to leave OGB in the game indefinitely in a broken state because the damage it causes to the gameplay should just be 'tolerated'.

The Revenue is King Argument

In order to use OGB you need to subscribe for an account on which to keep the boosting pilot. Therefore OGB provides CCP with revenue. It would not be appropriate for CCP to nerf OGB as this would lead to players that use OGB unsubscribing accounts. CCP's primary objective is to increase the wealth of its shareholders. Good gameplay isn't actually the priority.

The EVE is Harsh Argument

The magical thing about EVE is that it is a very harsh environment. That is why it is appropriate for players use OGB to gain an advantage, at no risk, for a monetary cost, as it is in keeping with EVE's harsh environment. 'Pay to win' mentality would usually be frowned upon, but it is a very appropriate game mechanic in a harsh sandbox like EVE.

The Fair Argument

In competitive gaming 'pay to win' is typically frowned upon. However CCP has made OGB available to all players in EVE via their 'pay to win' mechanism, which makes it ok. Anyone can subscribe an extra account with them, and train up a boosting alt to provide a risk free combat advantage (and actually quite a massive advantage at that). If players do not wish to wait to train the alts, they can purchase plex, and sell this for in game isk, and purchase a boosting alt on the character bazaar.

The 'Elite Solo PVP' Argument

Eve contains a small number of elite solo pvpers. These guys are very good indeed. They use OGB to help them fight against whole gangs of pilots solo. Without the availability of the OGB 'pay to win' mechanism they would not be able to do this as nearly well, therefore it is important that OGB remains in the game so that these elite solo pvpers can continue to own gangs single handed (and without having to risk their boosting alt).

It doesn't matter that a bi-product is that hundreds of 'entry level' tech 1 frigates and destroyers in faction war space are linked to the teeth, which effectively give these ships the same performance as if they were fit with top end modules, only at zero isk risk, and hence allow them to roflstomp any true solo pilot. Pay to win is acceptable in eve and should be embraced.

The 'It has always been like this' Argument

One of the strongest arguments you can make in support of a current game mechanic is that it has always been like it. OGB has been around a very long time, therefore, it logically follows that it should persist into the future for a long time. Whilst deciding on whether to keep OGB using logic is certainly reasonable, it is in fact more appropriate to make the decision simply on the basis of how long the mechanic has already persisted.

The 'elite Small Gang pvp' Argument

Small gang PVP is one of the most elite forms of PVP in EVE. But it is now in danger of extinction. All the pros and big names in EVE agree that without an OGB providing a small gang with a massive ship performance boost (pretty much akin to each of the ships in fleet getting top end performance from tech 2 fits) small gang would be dead.

Small gangs need the OGB 'pay to win' mechanism to remain viable. This isn't a battle to save OGB, it is a war to save solo and small gang.

The Curbstomp while Outnumbered Argument

It is easy in eve to change a 10 vs 15 fleet fight into the equivalent of a 40 vs 15 curbstomp. All you need is the OGB force multiplier (and you can use this force multiplier at absolutely no risk). The reason why this is a really good thing for the game is because it provides really good content. It is really cool seeing an outnumbered fleet curbstomp a larger group of pilots on youtube, so CCP should definitely not nerf OGB. If anything, make it more of an advantage. Pilots without links will complain, but most pros agree, they need to just deal with it.

The Force Multiplier Disuse Argument

The primary problem with using a force multiplier, like logistics or jammers, is that a fleet must defend them against being primaried in a fight. This is why most fleets in eve do not use jammers or logistics. It is important for CCP to keep OGB a 100% inside POS shield thing, else people will stop using it like they did jammers and logistics.

If I have missed any of the main arguments, please let me know and I will include them.

Regards
Benjen "Manual Pilot" Gelade
Call Rollard
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2 - 2013-06-20 14:56:18 UTC
I personally think that Off Grid Boosting should remain for mining etc, Rorq's are too risky to bring into a site.

But then in Combat, you require on-grid boosts for the boosting modules, so Vulture, Loki etc. Cov ops boosting must not be cloaked to give boosts.

For combat. I believe the boosting modules must be used on-grid, however your general boosting levels can be done offgrid.

Comment on this suggestion.
Dave Stark
#3 - 2013-06-20 14:57:35 UTC
Benjen Gelade wrote:
The Mining Argument

In EVE it is not convenient for miners to use mining boosts on grid.


no, having a rorqual deployed is the issue, not it being on grid.
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#4 - 2013-06-20 14:59:13 UTC
You forgot "It's always been like that, why change it now?"


Also, if they remove OGB it will flood Jita with hundreds of alts that will have to double everyone's isk before they can unsub and quit the game.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.

Mr M
Sebiestor Tribe
#5 - 2013-06-20 15:00:56 UTC
No, you're wrong. No risk, no gain. No boosting ship on grid, no boost.

Share your experience

Write for the EVE Tribune

www.eve-tribune.com

BoBoZoBo
MGroup9
#6 - 2013-06-20 15:01:49 UTC
Call Rollard wrote:
I personally think that Off Grid Boosting should remain for mining etc, Rorq's are too risky to bring into a site.



Herein lies the problem of many EVE players. Hope CCP is taking note.

Primary Test Subject • SmackTalker Elite

Ariel Dawn
Cambridge Mountain Rescue
#7 - 2013-06-20 15:04:44 UTC
Off-grid boosting should remain so for mining as it's not really something people take advantage of in PvP.

Having command modules that are active make your ship SIGNIFICANTLY easier to scan down could be a decent middle-ground in this issue. Being able to put together unscannable T3s is the silly part, considering how a max-skilled boost character gives everyone in their fleet the equivalent of ~2 top-end officer mods. Some of the things being boosted need to be toned down or improved as well.
Adunh Slavy
#8 - 2013-06-20 15:05:18 UTC
Benjen Gelade wrote:

The Fair Argument
Anyone can subscribe an extra account with them ...

The 'Elite Solo PVP' Argument
Eve contains a small number of elite solo pvpers. These guys are very good indeed. They use OGB to help them fight against whole gangs of pilots solo.


So ... pay to win, is that it?

And an elite 'solo' PVPer doesn't have an alt, a solo player is indeed one character, not some shlub with a command ship in a safe spot and a cloaked falcon wandering around in case the 'elite solo' gets in trouble.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
R I O T
#9 - 2013-06-20 15:10:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
I've said this before, many times, and I'll say it again: off-grid boosting is an equalizing factor for battles with numerical disparities.

If two forces of different size are fighting each other, and the boosting can be done off-grid, then the forces are proportionally as efficient as if there was no boosting at all, assuming no significant differences in boosting skills.

If two forces of different size are fighting each other, and the boosting can only be done on-grid, then the larger force gets a significant advantage over the smaller force, because:

1. the larger force is more able to defend its boosting ships due to being able to proportionally field more logistics
2. the larger force is more able to attack the smaller force's boosting ships because its superior DPS overpowers them quicker
3. the larger force, by its very nature, is more able to field backup boosting ships to immediately replace the ones lost due to enemy action

These three factors combined would make smaller forces objectively worse off when fighting larger ones, and that is on top of having a numerical disadvantage, than they are today.

So, if you advocate on-grid boosting, you're basically saying "I like to blob my enemies, and it would be nice if CCP made it so that I could blob my enemies more efficiently. Please, CCP, change this mechanic so that I am able to use my organization's superior numbers to an even greater advantage over smaller parties. Creating such a disincentive to small-scale pvp would really help me further my own goals at the expense of the game as a whole."

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted

Benjen Gelade
Doomheim
#10 - 2013-06-20 15:22:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Benjen Gelade
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
I've said this before, many times, and I'll say it again: off-grid boosting is an equalizing factor for battles with numerical disparities.

If two forces of different size are fighting each other, and the boosting can be done off-grid, then the forces are proportionally as efficient as if there was no boosting at all, assuming no significant differences in boosting skills.

If two forces of different size are fighting each other, and the boosting can only be done on-grid, then the larger force gets a significant advantage over the smaller force, because:

1. the larger force is more able to defend its boosting ships due to being able to proportionally field more logistics
2. the larger force is more able to attack the smaller force's boosting ships because its superior DPS overpowers them quicker
3. the larger force, by its very nature, is more able to field backup boosting ships to immediately replace the ones lost due to enemy action

These three factors combined would make smaller forces objectively worse off when fighting larger ones, and that is on top of having a numerical disadvantage, than they are today.

So, if you advocate on-grid boosting, you're basically saying "I like to blob my enemies, and it would be nice if CCP made it so that I could blob my enemies more efficiently. Please, CCP, change this mechanic so that I am able to use my organization's superior numbers to an even greater advantage over smaller parties. Creating such a disincentive to small-scale pvp would really help me further my own goals at the expense of the game as a whole."


The funny thing is, whilst you were trying to frame the '1,2,3' scenario as totally unfair and unjust, with only the mentally sick thinking it is a realistic way for battles to work, I actually thought it made perfect sense....

I guess I better get my head examined
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
R I O T
#11 - 2013-06-20 15:25:32 UTC
Benjen Gelade wrote:
The funny thing is, whilst you were trying to frame the '1,2,3' scenario as totally unfair and unjust, with only the mentally sick thinking it is a realistic way for battles to work, I actually thought it made perfect sense....

I guess I better get my head examined

It's like asking CCP to make doomsday damage scale with the amount of people in your fleet. It's that bad of an idea.

But of course everyone has his own agenda so I doubt I'll be changing the minds of people who would actively benefit from this stupid proposed change.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted

Van Hiaasen
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#12 - 2013-06-20 15:25:45 UTC


Benjen Gelade wrote:
The reason for this is because CCP cannot code a new 'role bonus' for the Rorqua


Benjen Gelade wrote:
The reason for this is because it is actually really difficult for the CCP programmers to fix OGB and will take them a very, very long time. As it will take such a long time, they cannot disable it for that long.


Do you have any links of CCP saying the above you mentioned? I'd like to read about it.

I fully support what you are saying. I believe OGB is completely fine within current mechanics. I use a carrier in a POS to boost me and my gang as we run sites in the system. I'm sure as hell not bringing my carrier into the site on grid with the site-running gang!

However I do believe that using unprobable, cloaky, nullified T3's to OGB is overpowered. OGB should be limited to capital ships only, T3's and command ships should have to be on grid to perform the function.

I have a Loki fitted for PVP that is cloaked and nullified so its damn near uncatcheable at gates even with bubbles. It is also unprobable so it can sit off grid uncloaked at a safe and provide boosts with 100% immunity. It also has the probing subsystem and sisters probe launcher so it can probe down enemies in system and warp my squad straight to them. I use this Loki fairly often and everytime I do I feel much overpowered with all the things I can do at pretty much zero risk.
Mistress Lilu
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#13 - 2013-06-20 15:27:49 UTC
Getting rid of OGB is the dumbest thing CCP can do.
In the last year or so, CCP along with the big alliances in game have, behind closed doors, along with CSM, have decided that solo/small gang pvp is no longer relevant. Why make a group of people happy, when the real money is coming from the mindless sheeps in the large alliances.
Last several years, ccp has done all it can to destroy solo/small gang pvp with killing mods, creating b.ullshit mods that are mediocre, running around the issue of OP ECM.
Now, get rid of OGB,come on dudes. The only people who will use boosts are gonna be the large alliances. They are gonna have double boosts with 3 logi ships dedicated to each booster. What is 3 logi when your corp can field 300+ pilots.
THANK YOU CCP FOR KILLING SOLO/SMALL GANG.
Destination SkillQueue
Doomheim
#14 - 2013-06-20 15:41:52 UTC
The mere fact you people defend the existance of off grid boosting by using solo PvP as justification is pretty hilarious. First, there is nothing solo about it, if you're using multiple characters at the same time. Second, if using boosters has truly come to the point, that solo players feel they can't fight without using one, it's just one more reason to let OGB die in a fire.
Lucy Ferrr
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#15 - 2013-06-20 15:45:13 UTC
Mistress Lilu wrote:
Getting rid of OGB is the dumbest thing CCP can do.
In the last year or so, CCP along with the big alliances in game have, behind closed doors, along with CSM, have decided that solo/small gang pvp is no longer relevant. Why make a group of people happy, when the real money is coming from the mindless sheeps in the large alliances.
Last several years, ccp has done all it can to destroy solo/small gang pvp with killing mods, creating b.ullshit mods that are mediocre, running around the issue of OP ECM.
Now, get rid of OGB,come on dudes. The only people who will use boosts are gonna be the large alliances. They are gonna have double boosts with 3 logi ships dedicated to each booster. What is 3 logi when your corp can field 300+ pilots.
THANK YOU CCP FOR KILLING SOLO/SMALL GANG.


You must be on drugs, very very good drugs. It's not nice of you to not share, cause they must be very good if you think OGB helps the small guy. OGB is the single biggest kick in the balls to small gang and solo PvP. One person multiboxing 3 characters and an OGB is not 'elite solo PvP'.
ElQuirko
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2013-06-20 15:47:18 UTC
BoBoZoBo wrote:
Call Rollard wrote:
I personally think that Off Grid Boosting should remain for mining etc, Rorq's are too risky to bring into a site.

Herein lies the problem of many EVE players. Hope CCP is taking note.


Well ****, I forgot risk vs reward wasn't a thing in this game anymore.

Dodixie > Hek

Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
R I O T
#17 - 2013-06-20 15:47:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
Destination SkillQueue wrote:
if using boosters has truly come to the point, that solo players feel they can't fight without using one, it's just one more reason to let OGB die in a fire.

The conclusion does not follow from the premise.

Like wishing that a nation would collapse on itself because its taxes are too high. Always throw out the baby with the bathwater, right?

But don't get me wrong, I'd rather boosting was removed entirely than be made off-grid only. At least that way numerical superiority doesn't become more of a requirement than it is today.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted

Adunh Slavy
#18 - 2013-06-20 15:50:56 UTC
Mistress Lilu wrote:

In the last year or so, CCP along with the big alliances in game have, behind closed doors, along with CSM, have decided that solo/small gang pvp is no longer relevant.


It is not my intention to derail this thread from the main topic but think this should be addressed.

Solo and small gang PVP is more impacted by things other than large groups of sheep. Instead it is impacted by how easy it is to move those sheep and how it is all too common that tactical situations give advantage to herds.


  • Power projection is too cheap and too easy.
  • Not that I personally enjoyed having to slow boat 15km on every jump, WTZ has made the map much smaller from the perspective of time.
  • Travel mechanics in are too heavily skewed towards perfect information rather than imperfect information.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Hessian Arcturus
Doomheim
#19 - 2013-06-20 15:57:23 UTC
Mr M wrote:
No, you're wrong. No risk, no gain. No boosting ship on grid, no boost.


Quoted this purely because this guy has his head screwed on...Agreed!

It's human nature to want to explore. To find your line and go beyond it. The only limit, is the one you set yourself.

Samillian
Angry Mustellid
#20 - 2013-06-20 15:59:06 UTC
Boosting on grid or not at all.

NBSI shall be the whole of the Law

123Next pageLast page