These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey 1.1] Warfare Links, Mindlinks, Gang bonuses

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Blacksworth
Supreme Incursion Command Ops.
#441 - 2013-08-04 06:58:00 UTC

  • Warfare links (other than mining links) can no longer be activated inside a starbase forcefield
    • People can still orbit just outside the forcefield I know, but they will at least have to keep an eye on that character so it's an improvement.

    So now i need to buy 2nd monitor to watch all the time my tengu fleet booster/ GREAT!
    Guy that a mistake with forcefield . Do u think about low/null sec gang boosters ?
    Or u think that only mining link working in low/null sec ?
    Lets all be fair! Good tone is to make orbiting rorqual in null sec. That will be an improvement.

    2nd point is ttaht from Odyssey 1.1 logi will no longer be so sexy as former. -10% reducing link efectivnes t2 ST will be like meta4
    before omg Odyssey 1.1
    Why touch that work great ?

    I can close my eyes at many things but
  • Warfare links (other than mining links) can no longer be activated inside a starbase forcefield a real mistake.

    • PS: Holy rage on u from all low/null sec fleet boosters

    btw! Is titan bonuses to amount of shield/armor hp will be given to all fleet members if titan under forcefield?
    Mez Tek
    MZ-T
    #442 - 2013-08-04 07:04:23 UTC
    MainDrain wrote:
    Obviously there won't be a navy version of the mining links, but will there be an Ore version of the mining links with the same increase in bonus as the Navy links?



    It would be fair to have Navy mining Link, so you could shield boost to discourage ganks and still maintain mining Links. I see nothing unfair about 2 boosts
    Mez Tek
    MZ-T
    #443 - 2013-08-04 07:07:03 UTC
    MainDrain wrote:
    Obviously there won't be a navy version of the mining links, but will there be an Ore version of the mining links with the same increase in bonus as the Navy links?
    Sollis Vynneve
    Destructive Silence
    #444 - 2013-08-04 12:37:47 UTC
    ogb evening the gap between lower sp toons and higher sp toons. lol. removing ogb would be stupid ccp would have to fix grids and completely rework t3s so they can have a tank and be ongrid. so remove the need for command processors and lower the fitting requirements for links. why not just add a new bonus to fleet command skills level 1 boosts within 1au level 2 2 aus and so on
    Harvey James
    The Sengoku Legacy
    #445 - 2013-08-04 13:23:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
    Fozzie

    Have you tried to fit links on all T1 bc's ships?
    drake lacks cpu to fit a link

    And it seems most people agree that you could nerf links further .. i think more in the form of reducing skills and mindlink strength rather than nerfing the links themselves as this would benefit T1 bc's too.

    T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

    ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

    Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
    Sgt Ocker
    What Corp is it
    #446 - 2013-08-04 13:27:40 UTC
    CCP Fozzie wrote:

    Mining Foreman: Laser Optimization and Harvester Capacitor
    T1: 5%
    T2: 7.5%
    Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 42.2%
    Former max bonus: 42.2%

    Mining Foreman: Field Enhancement
    T1: 13.6%
    T2: 17%
    Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 95.7%
    Former max bonus: 95%


    We are planning to extend the bonuses from the defensive gang links to local capital repair modules.

    And finally we're making some significant changes to the availability of mindlink implants:
  • Adding normal T2 mindlinks (including mining mindlinks) to the Concord LP store for 20,000 Concord LP and 20m isk (~60-80m final product sale price).
  • Adding Navy Mindlinks with the 25% bonus to two different disciplines at once (matching racial command ship bonuses) to the normal racial LP stores at 150,000 LP and 50m isk (~200m isk final product sale price).

    • Links at the top lead to the threads for Command Ship and local repair module changes, and we're very interested to hear your feedback on these changes in the thread below.
    Mining Foreman Harvester Capacitor, since the changes to mining barges and T2 variants I haven't found a need for this link as cycling lasers no longer sucks cap dry.. Any chance of giving Orcas and Rorquals a small bonus to Siege links?
    Giving local only boosts to capitals is somewhat a shame as a lot of fleet fits use buffer tank and remote reps.
    T2 mind links available via Concord LP is good, not sure about your "final product sale price", did anyone look to see what T1 mind links are selling for? At 60-80mil per; that would make it over 1bil cheaper than the T1 mining mindlink sells for now.

    My opinions are mine.

      If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

    It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
    Harvey James
    The Sengoku Legacy
    #447 - 2013-08-04 14:58:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
    All defensive (Siege and Armored) links:
    T1: 8%
    T2: 11%
    Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 17.5%
    Former max bonus: 35%

    Information Warfare: Electronic Superiority bonuses to ECM and Target Painters:
    T1: 8%
    T2: 11%
    Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 17.5%
    Former max bonus: 35%

    Information Warfare: Electronic Superiority bonuses to Tracking Disruptors and Sensor Damps:
    T1: 7%
    T2: 10%
    Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 16%
    Former max bonus: 21%

    Information Warfare: Recon Operation:
    T1: 8%
    T2: 11%
    Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 17.5%
    Former max bonus: 35%

    Information Warfare: Sensor Integrity:
    T1: 13%
    T2: 16%
    Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 25.6%
    Former max bonus: 53%

    Skirmish Warfare: Evasive Maneuvers:
    T1: 8%
    T2: 11%
    Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 17.5%
    Former max bonus: 35%

    Skirmish Warfare: Interdiction Maneuvers:
    T1: 9%
    T2: 12%
    Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 19.2%
    Former max bonus: 53%

    Skirmish Warfare: Rapid Deployment:
    T1: 8%
    T2: 11%
    Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 17.5%
    Former max bonus: 35%

    The four Warfare Specialist skill bonus changed from the current 100% bonus per level (after the first level) to 6% bonus per level.
    Mindlink bonus reduced from +50% to +16%
    Powergrid need of all warfare links modules decreased by 100.

    This is more like what i would like to see and think is much more balanced at least until OGB is removed anyway.
    And its much easier to understand how you get the end result on the bonus
    20% Command Ship ..16% mind-link... 24% from skills

    NEW T1 mindlink - 10%
    T2 mindlink -16%
    NEW Navy mindlink - 13% bonus to the two racial links

    CCP could even add navy warfare links which could be placed inbetween the T1 and T2 with lower fittings and cap usage

    Would this be more towards peoples preference?

    T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

    ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

    Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
    Blacksworth
    Supreme Incursion Command Ops.
    #448 - 2013-08-04 16:08:08 UTC
    How about null sec claim war`s ? where da booster gonna be? i tell u where! in primary )))))
    Raging Beaver
    Republic University
    Minmatar Republic
    #449 - 2013-08-04 17:05:30 UTC
    Blacksworth wrote:
    How about null sec claim war`s ? where da booster gonna be? i tell u where! in primary )))))


    And you think nobody is aware of this? How about reading the thread thoroughly?...

    This is precisely the point and please, learn to English.
    Raging Beaver
    Republic University
    Minmatar Republic
    #450 - 2013-08-04 17:31:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Raging Beaver
    Sollis Vynneve wrote:
    ogb evening the gap between lower sp toons and higher sp toons.


    Yes, or they make the gap much bigger if the other side has them. Apart from this, I don't think this was the main aim of boosters and - of course - on-grid boosters will do the exact same job.

    Sollis Vynneve wrote:
    removing ogb would be stupid ccp would have to fix grids and completely rework t3s so they can have a tank and be ongrid. so remove the need for command processors and lower the fitting requirements for links


    While you are correct about the grids needing to be fixed before removal of off-grid boosting, you are wrong about everything else:
    1. It wouldn't be stupid.
    2. They wouldn't have to do anything to the T3's. You can have a boosting T3 on grid, tanked and fully combat-capable, but you can only run one link. As with everything in eve, you want more than the default fitting? You need to sacrifice something. If you want to run 3 links - you need to sacrifice 2 mid-slots, it's your problem and nobody else's how you are going to fit other necessary modules - nobody's forcing you to fit more than one link, get it? The fact that T3's are better at boosting than dedicated command ships is ridiculous, this needs to be fixed and not made worse, and on the other hand, Command Processors are also a part of the problem (I'd remove them entirely, but that's my opinion...).
    FT Diomedes
    The Graduates
    #451 - 2013-08-04 17:39:15 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Diomedes
    Three changes would make this work better:

    1. Make it so that 1 CS from each race has decent tank bonuses for solo/small gang and the other is designed for larger fleet combat. All CS have useful weapon and tank bonuses. You want them on grid and in the fight. All CS are geared to fight a class up, not down. As seen below, weapon bonuses are designed to complement the tank bonus. Thus:

    A. Amarr - the Absolution gets buffer tank bonus to armor resistances and HP. It gets range and damage bonus for turrets. It is now the fleet CS. The Damnation gets active armor tank bonus and missile velocity and damage bonus. It is now the small gang booster or soloer with utility highs (designed for HAMs).

    B. Caldari - the Vulture gets passive/buffer tank bonus, with range and damage for turrets. The Nighthawk gets active tank and missile bonus (designed for HML).

    C. Gallente - Astarte gets passive/buffer bonus for armor with tracking and damage bonus for turrets. The Eos gets active armor bonus and drone damage.

    D. Minmatar - Sleipnir gets passive/buffer bonus for shield with tracking and damage for turrets. Claymore gets active bonus for shields with missile velocity and range bonus (designed for HAMS).

    2. Limit the number of pilots who can be boosted by any CS to a squad. Thus, a full fleet would have 25+ command ships. Cannot find pilots? Tough. Eve is about choices.

    3. For each level of a high level leadership skill, a pilot can boost another 50km range - regardless of grid.

    As for T3s, they should be less effective, but truly versatile. All able to fit any three links without command processors, but no bonuses to any particular bonus type.

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

    Gizznitt Malikite
    Agony Unleashed
    Agony Empire
    #452 - 2013-08-04 17:52:46 UTC
    Harvey James wrote:
    Harvey James wrote:
    All defensive (Siege and Armored) links:
    T1: 14%
    T2: 16%
    Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 24%
    Former max bonus: 35%



    Does anyone else think this is a better proposal than the OP?


    TBH, no....

    The cumulative benefit of defensive (Siege and Armor) has NO BUSINESS being more effective than pirate implants and drugs.

    Full Crystal Set: +54% Shield Boosts.
    Standard / Improved / Strong Blue Pill: + 20% / 25% / 30% Shield Boosts.

    Shield Harmonizing: 24% Resists = 1 / .76 = 31.5% Effective Increase to Shield Boosts.
    Active Shielding: 24% Rate of Boosts = 1 / .76 = 31.5% Effective Increase to Shield Boosting.

    Cumulative Effect of the three Siege Links = 1.315*1.315 = 1.73 = 73% Effective Increase in Reps.

    This is way to high!!!! Reduce Defensive links to 12.5% maximum bonus. This will put their cumulative rep bonus at 30%, which is pretty much where it should be, at least until Boosters are forced On Grid.
    Harvey James
    The Sengoku Legacy
    #453 - 2013-08-04 17:56:35 UTC
    Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
    Harvey James wrote:
    Harvey James wrote:
    All defensive (Siege and Armored) links:
    T1: 14%
    T2: 16%
    Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 24%
    Former max bonus: 35%



    Does anyone else think this is a better proposal than the OP?


    TBH, no....

    The cumulative benefit of defensive (Siege and Armor) has NO BUSINESS being more effective than pirate implants and drugs.

    Full Crystal Set: +54% Shield Boosts.
    Standard / Improved / Strong Blue Pill: + 20% / 25% / 30% Shield Boosts.

    Shield Harmonizing: 24% Resists = 1 / .76 = 31.5% Effective Increase to Shield Boosts.
    Active Shielding: 24% Rate of Boosts = 1 / .76 = 31.5% Effective Increase to Shield Boosting.

    Cumulative Effect of the three Siege Links = 1.315*1.315 = 1.73 = 73% Effective Increase in Reps.

    This is way to high!!!! Reduce Defensive links to 12.5% maximum bonus. This will put their cumulative rep bonus at 30%, which is pretty much where it should be, at least until Boosters are forced On Grid.


    well 24% is lower than fozzies proposal in OP and the post was asking is it better than the OP version .. so the answer would be yes... it seems to me that the drugs/implants could do with a nerf aswell

    T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

    ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

    Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
    derAxlhalt
    Imperial Academy
    Amarr Empire
    #454 - 2013-08-04 18:09:09 UTC  |  Edited by: derAxlhalt
    Thanks Fozzie for finally do something about offgrid boosting, but u dramatically miss the point.
    They wont disappear coz u ban Warfare Link Modules from Force Fields . PPL will still stick to this example Fit:

    [Legion, Boni-Legion]
    Co-Processor II
    'Halcyon' Core Equalizer I
    Warded Radar Backup Cluster I
    Nanofiber Internal Structure II

    Conjunctive Radar ECCM Scanning Array I
    Command Processor I
    Command Processor I
    Conjunctive Radar ECCM Scanning Array I
    100MN Afterburner II

    Armored Warfare Link - Passive Defense II
    Armored Warfare Link - Damage Control II
    Armored Warfare Link - Rapid Repair II
    Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
    50W Infectious Power System Malfunction
    Auto Targeting System I

    Medium Processor Overclocking Unit I
    Medium Processor Overclocking Unit I
    Medium Low Friction Nozzle Joints I

    Legion Defensive - Warfare Processor
    Legion Electronics - Dissolution Sequencer
    Legion Engineering - Capacitor Regeneration Matrix
    Legion Offensive - Covert Reconfiguration
    Legion Propulsion - Interdiction Nullifier

    Guess why?? Coz its cheaper then fielding them.

    The current ( after 1.1) Field Fit would/could look like this:

    [Legion, Boni-Legion ongrid armor]
    Damage Control II
    1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
    1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
    True Sansha Armor EM Hardener
    True Sansha Armor Thermic Hardener
    Dread Guristas Co-Processor

    10MN Afterburner II
    Command Processor I
    Command Processor I
    Small Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 400

    Armored Warfare Link - Rapid Repair II
    Armored Warfare Link - Passive Defense II
    Armored Warfare Link - Damage Control II
    [empty high slot]
    [empty high slot]
    [empty high slot]

    Medium Trimark Armor Pump II
    Medium Trimark Armor Pump II
    Medium Anti-Kinetic Pump II

    Legion Defensive - Warfare Processor
    Legion Electronics - Tactical Targeting Network
    Legion Engineering - Capacitor Regeneration Matrix
    Legion Offensive - Assault Optimization
    Legion Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst

    But no FC will be willing to field that coz it lacks tank and is to expensive for its ablities.
    This fit is btw plain better then ure current Gallente CS post, so what ever u think a Fleet CS should look like, they (gal CS) cant do it.

    U could solve that with 2 simple Solutions:
    1.Erase the Warfare Link Modul Restrictions on all Warfare Processor Subsystems (can then Field 3 Warfare Links) once added cause of the 5% Bonus (after 1.1 2% so this problem of OP is solved too) BTW the restriction is/was the cause for Cloaky Nulli Offgrid Booster (PG and CPU problems) so u neglected us the Opportunity to field them.
    2. Add an CPU Multiplier of 200% plus to both Nullifier and Covert Subsystems after the first Warfare Link modul for each additional Warfare Link is fitted.

    After that they could look like this:

    [Legion, Boni-Legion ongrid armor]
    Damage Control II
    1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
    1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
    Armor EM Hardener II
    Armor Thermic Hardener II
    Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II

    10MN Afterburner II
    Medium Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 800
    Conjunctive Radar ECCM Scanning Array I
    Conjunctive Radar ECCM Scanning Array I

    Armored Warfare Link - Rapid Repair II
    Armored Warfare Link - Passive Defense II
    Armored Warfare Link - Damage Control II
    [empty high slot]
    [empty high slot]
    [empty high slot]

    Medium Trimark Armor Pump II
    Medium Trimark Armor Pump II
    Medium Anti-Kinetic Pump II

    Legion Defensive - Warfare Processor
    Legion Electronics - Tactical Targeting Network
    Legion Engineering - Capacitor Regeneration Matrix
    Legion Offensive - Assault Optimization
    Legion Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst

    What u get from this is an more reliable Mini CS that would perfectly fit in Cuiser/AHAC/ShieldHAC isnt OP still no match for real CS more agile as those sitting ducks. Enough CPU left to fit a 4. Warfare Link and a Command Processor(gets weaker but is more flexible [something u want why else would u give them the opportunity to fit 3 different kinds of links] ) And the Officer mod, Slave set discussion is a joke for example the Damnation is an Mini Carrier when ure willing to sacrifice isk.

    ATM Damnation is/could be this:

    [Damnation, New Setup 1]
    1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
    1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates II
    Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
    Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
    True Sansha Energized EM Membrane
    Armor Thermic Hardener II

    Small Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 400
    Conjunctive Radar ECCM Scanning Array I
    Shadow Serpentis 10MN Afterburner
    Command Processor I

    Armored Warfare Link - Rapid Repair II
    Armored Warfare Link - Passive Defense II
    Information Warfare Link - Recon Operation II
    Information Warfare Link - Sensor Integrity II
    [empty high slot]
    [empty high slot]
    [empty high slot]

    Medium Trimark Armor Pump II
    Medium Trimark Armor Pump II


    But there the trouble starts! U cant copy this setup to the Gallente CS to get 2 additional Warfare Link in ure fleet by weakening an weak ship further or ure entire fleet ( Gal CS gets blaped faster-> skirmish boni gone fleet more or less over) . Why then adding different kinds of link possibilities when we cant us them in a proper way?
    Why will we be forced to go offgrid again with this ship to get our fleetboni alive?
    Why cant u add to EOS 10% Armorhp per lvl instet of this useless tracking Boni idea and iterate the rep boost down to prevent this ship to be an OP Small Gang ONLY , Fleet useless dustkeeper?

    Thanks for ure time.
    U dont belief me, check it out there: http://failheap-challenge.com/showthread.php?11380-Odyssey-Changes-Rebalanced-Navy-Cruisers-T1-Cruisers-

    The options are there, please shape them in the right direction.
    Mr Floydy
    Questionable Ethics.
    Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
    #455 - 2013-08-04 18:29:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Floydy
    FT Diomedes wrote:

    D. Minmatar - Sleipnir gets passive/buffer bonus for shield with tracking and damage for turrets.

    Hell no. Some of the ideas sounded ok, but completely change a ship as fun as the Sleipnir so you can go blobbing around null? Nah. You can buffer up the claymore instead please.

    I say keep the current Fleet command ships as the ones for big blob warfare, with buffer bonuses. The Damnation and Vulture to some extent do this pretty well. Add buffer bonuses to the Claymore and the Eos.
    Regan Rotineque
    The Scope
    Gallente Federation
    #456 - 2013-08-04 19:04:16 UTC
    Question

    I seem to remember during a fanfest presentation the talk about making the mindlinks and such items that would be created and made by players.

    Perhaps instead of LP store items - you add the parts and prints to the lewt pinatas in the data/relic sites.

    Let players work and build and make these things, not just buy them with carebear dollars at an LP store.

    Just my 2 cents.

    I had been looking forward to more iterations on the exploration part and this was a good example that fit with adding more things to that area of the game.

    ~Regan~
    Harvey James
    The Sengoku Legacy
    #457 - 2013-08-04 19:29:38 UTC
    Fozzie

    you need to make some T1 mindlinks before adding navy version surely and T2 should be the best clearly

    T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

    ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

    Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
    Sigras
    Conglomo
    #458 - 2013-08-04 23:07:05 UTC
    Harvey James wrote:
    Fozzie

    you need to make some T1 mindlinks before adding navy version surely and T2 should be the best clearly

    in what way is it clear that T2 should be better than faction?

    You mean like the T2 webs are better than faction?
    Or like the T2 hardeners are better than faction?
    Or like the T2 damage mods are better than faction?
    Scrutt5
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #459 - 2013-08-05 05:36:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Scrutt5
    Fantastic start, off grid boosting being eliminated all together is probably the wish of every solo pilot or small roaming gang.
    For far to long mini game pilots have taken a far superior edge using the often heard excuse of "we'll you come into my home system".

    Having said that, are we likely to see frigate and cruiser boosting variants in the future ? With FW gang combat traditionally orientating towards plex size restriction, it would be great to incorporate a means of providing boosts that are visible on grid.
    Omnathious Deninard
    University of Caille
    Gallente Federation
    #460 - 2013-08-05 05:40:34 UTC
    I have to agree with whoever suggested that command processors be turned into rigs.
    That would give:
    Command ships 5 links
    T3 4 links
    Battle cruisers 4 links

    I don't think there would be a need for a penalty for them as they are a very specific module.

    If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.