These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

What should CCP do about command ships vs T3? (spoiler alert: answer inside)
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Griznatch
Distinguished Gentleman's Boating Club
Domain Research and Mining Inst.
#21 - 2011-11-14 20:37:59 UTC
Another thought I just had. If t2 ships are better than t1, it follows that a t3 should be better than t2. If theyre supposed to be less effective than t2 shouldnt they be t1.5 or something?

I used to have a clever sig but I lost it.
Haniblecter Teg
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2011-11-14 20:49:10 UTC
CS ships are useless.


If someone is going to be boosting a fleet, they're going to be doing it off grid anyways, which means they can risk the ISK which means they'll do it in the marginally better T3.


Either force boosting to be ongrid, thus risk the money or make CS's better at it, like they should, cause they take waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more training.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#23 - 2011-11-14 21:10:31 UTC
Haniblecter Teg wrote:

Either force boosting to be ongrid, thus risk the money or make CS's better at it, like they should, cause they take waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more training.


Simply forcing the boosting to be on grid won't fix any problems with CS vs T3. Also, CS5 crew (x3) checking in.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Arbiter Reborn
Perkone
Caldari State
#24 - 2011-11-14 22:31:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Arbiter Reborn
Pr1ncess Alia wrote:
T3 are great. Love 'em. Like butter over warm bread.

But isn't the whole point that: they can be good at everything but not as good as the focused t2 version?

Should the t2 cmd ships be better than the t3 counterparts?
Lets take a vote:
(survey says: YYYYYNYYYYYYYYYYYNYYYY)


p.s.

Also,
whats up with not needing to be on grid to give bonuses? No brainer fix right there, if CCP knows anything they are looking at this already


the answer is a static mini titan bonus, ie sig, cap amount, shield hp etc..

off grid bonus nerf would help but the best answer is static bonus

ps im a epic member of cs5 crew
Lili Lu
#25 - 2011-11-15 00:56:32 UTC
Griznatch wrote:
I dont know where you got the idea that a t3 with 3 links, no tank and a half a percent better boost is "better" than a cs with a full rack of links and a massive tank but maybe you and I have a different definition of better. My vote is leave it as it is. Speaking of votes, you seem to have quite a few more "votes" than there are posts in this thread so I guess we count different too
You obviously are not getting the point. Currently the T3 buff is better and tank is irrelevant due to bubble nullifier and/or warping cloaked subsystems and use of eccm mods to make the ship essentially unprobable, all of which can allow the no tank T3 to give a better boost from off-grid. As to your comment on votes I cannot decifer what the hell you are talking about here.

Griznatch wrote:
Limiting boosting to on grid only would make t3 boosting utterly useless. Why bring a more expensive/less tanky/less links ship on grid with the fight? Nobody would use a t3 when they could use a command ship and be able to keep the links on for more than a few seconda after the fight starts.
Again you are not getting the fact that on-grid would limit the T3 to one better link and a tank to live on. The command ship could fit the 3 links and it's tank but the buff would be less. Thus if you want your whole fleet to get the effect of that one better T3 link you make it the fleet booster. The command ship(s) would be wing, or vice versa, you have the whole fleet receiving the 3 command ship links and maybe one (or each) wing receiving those but also one better T3 link. This is the kind of calculus that on-grid boosting with tanked boosters would mandate. A T3 if fitting one link is not needing co-pros and command processors and thus can fit a good survival tank.

Griznatch wrote:
What happens when you have a fleet reffin' a pos and you wanna spread your light tackle out on the gates to catch incoming hostiles, are you gonna set up a squad and command ship for each gate or do you just leave your light tackle without bonuses? Thats just one example why a fleet might not all be on the same grid.
Precisely, it creates more care that needs to be taken with multiple fleet roles and positioning. Yes you put a skirmish booster of some kind at the gate(s).

Griznatch wrote:
This thread smacks of crying about unprobable booster alts which arent unprobable anymore and are paper thin and extremely expensice, which are pretty decent limiting factors. If you like to fly command ships straight into the fray go ahead, but trying to change the game to fit your personal idea of how the game should work isnt in the interests of the game. Dont wanna fight a gang with a t3 booster? Change systems and make em move the booster or do without.
Oh? it seems to me you are the one crying "but why can't my T3 booster alt be an alt i can ss and ignore anymore? Why must a T3 fit a tank and fight? Sounds like the whaaaaaa is on your part. Btw your unprobable alts are still pretty much unprobable since it takes a maxed prober with implants and sisters gear to have a slight chance of finding it. As to expense, I would like to see this game rewarding sp (time) investment, not ingame currency investment.

Griznatch wrote:
Ps. If you have to run a bunch of officer co-pros youre doing it wrong. My tengu booster can run all 3 seige links, cloak, probes, ship scanner and passive targeter and it doesnt have a single co-pro on it.
Well of course. The Tengu is once again the best of the lot, but it was probably loaded with cpu because CCP thought you would use that cpu to fit a friggin tank. Try fitting a Loki with multiple links and it is not so easy.

In the end I too would rather that the commands had the better buff to provide a fleet.

And no just because it was called tech III it was not the goal of the ships to do everything better than multiple classes of tech II. The idea was that the ships would be modular and by switching subsystems you could have one cruiser hull perform multiple roles. Tech II recons still get better range on webs or points than tech III, it is only in the realm of HACs and particularly command ships where tech III stupidly outstripped the abilities of tech II.
Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#26 - 2011-11-15 01:43:22 UTC
You dont really get T3s if youre asking this question.
T3 boosters are DIFFERENT to CS boosters.

eg: damnation flies into combat with the fleet cos it can tank, legion does not.

T3s either sit at safes running ECCM or at a POS running 6 links.

theyre used differently and are fine the way they are.

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#27 - 2011-11-15 01:58:03 UTC
Jack Miton wrote:
You dont really get T3s if youre asking this question.
T3 boosters are DIFFERENT to CS boosters.

eg: damnation flies into combat with the fleet cos it can tank, legion does not.

T3s either sit at safes running ECCM or at a POS running 6 links.

theyre used differently and are fine the way they are.


Its relatively underwhelming to bring a fleet command to a fight. And really, why bother when you can instead bring a mostly AFK alt that doubles as a scout in a smaller interdiction nullified hull? Really, the only reason I've ever been tempted to bring a CS over a T3 was when we actually needed an extra point.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Lili Lu
#28 - 2011-11-15 02:22:33 UTC
Jack Miton wrote:
You dont really get T3s if youre asking this question.
T3 boosters are DIFFERENT to CS boosters.

eg: damnation flies into combat with the fleet cos it can tank, legion does not.

T3s either sit at safes running ECCM or at a POS running 6 links.

theyre used differently and are fine the way they are.


You don't get that you can do the same with a CS (fit 6 links on it) and safe place off grid. With either ship it is a stupid mechanic and stupid way to fit a ship. A legion could tank if is wasn't bastardized into fitting co-pros and command processors. It could fit one link and a fine tank, if it was forced to do so.

There is no reason to say to CCP do not change a feature you introduced perviously. I would prefer that CCP actually did follow up with balancing adjustments to T3, faction warfare, sov mechanics, incursions, etc. Only one of those things has been adjusted since being put on the server iirc. And, it still needs another adjustment badly.

This is supposed to be the balancing patch/expansion apparently. So this and other threads are for raising an issue that CCP has overlooked. Some people it seems look at each thing in the game as it presently exists, find a flaw to take advantage of, and say never change things. Others look at the game and prefer that it be dynamic and adjusted to make a better game.
m0cking bird
Doomheim
#29 - 2011-11-15 02:52:55 UTC
CCP just needs to NERF off grid fleet boosting. Gang links should have a 100 - 120km effect range or something. I also think command ships should out boost t3's...
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#30 - 2011-11-15 03:21:30 UTC
m0cking bird wrote:
CCP just needs to NERF off grid fleet boosting. Gang links should have a 100 - 120km effect range or something. I also think command ships should out boost t3's...


Off grid boosting was never something people bitched about until interdiction nullified effectively unprobeable T3s came onto the scene. I think its probably a good idea to take a look at what's actually causing the problem instead of whining about something that's never really been an issue.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Griznatch
Distinguished Gentleman's Boating Club
Domain Research and Mining Inst.
#31 - 2011-11-15 08:34:40 UTC
Lili Lu wrote:
lots of words



All of your proposed solutions will completely break the t3 gang link idea and make the subsystems useless. The t3s have to have something to offer that exceeds the command ships otherwise the CS is always the better option. Forcing boosting on grid and requiring you to tank your t3 booster to the point of only running 1 link is absurd. You could get nearly as much benefit from a BC with 1 link for a tiny fraction of the cost. Your comment about adding more to the makeup of fleets and boosters sounds ok for fleets of a hundred ships but a making a 10 man gang split up into 5 squads and bring 6 CS/T3 boosters to get what they can have right now will just make everyone grumpy and cause more problems than it solves. If it takes a maxed prober with implants and sisters gear to scan down an "unprobable" booster then that's what you need to bring if you're that worried about taking out someone's fleet booster. If they're parked in a pos then being hard to probe doesnt really matter anymore. I've been on big fleet engagements where there were command ships on the field, which is as it should be, and cant be too uncommon or I wouldn't have seen it. Offgrid fleet boosts dont appear to me to be as great a scourge to the epic quest for good fights you make it out to be, and you can just as easily park a CS in a pos or safe spot as you can a t3 booster. As far as rewarding time spend vs money spent, I can buy a character that flys command ships just as easily as I can a t3. At this point anything you want can be had quickly so talking about what it takes to get it is beside the point.

If you take the extra bonus away from the t3s, what do you give it that keeps it relevant as a fleet booster?

I used to have a clever sig but I lost it.
Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#32 - 2011-11-15 11:21:51 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
[quote=Jack Miton]You dont really get T3s if youre asking this question.
Really, the only reason I've ever been tempted to bring a CS over a T3 was when we actually needed an extra point.


er..ok...

what if youre jumping through a WH/gate?
or are roaming?

bringing a paper boosting ship just isnt viable in a LOT of situations.

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout
Lili Lu
#33 - 2011-11-15 13:25:37 UTC
Breaking up your wall of text

Griznatch wrote:

All of your proposed solutions will completely break the t3 gang link idea and make the subsystems useless.
No it won't. It would make the nullified unprobable T3 with 14 links impossible.

Griznatch wrote:
The t3s have to have something to offer that exceeds the command ships otherwise the CS is always the better option.
Whereas now the situation is reversed, T3s the better option. And without touching the current %s on-grid boosting would still leave T3 with a role, just not the same one.

Griznatch wrote:
Forcing boosting on grid and requiring you to tank your t3 booster to the point of only running 1 link is absurd. You could get nearly as much benefit from a BC with 1 link for a tiny fraction of the cost.
No, a BC does not have the same % boost.

Griznatch wrote:
Your comment about adding more to the makeup of fleets and boosters sounds ok for fleets of a hundred ships but a making a 10 man gang split up into 5 squads and bring 6 CS/T3 boosters to get what they can have right now will just make everyone grumpy and cause more problems than it solves. If it takes a maxed prober with implants and sisters gear to scan down an "unprobable" booster then that's what you need to bring if you're that worried about taking out someone's fleet booster. If they're parked in a pos then being hard to probe doesnt really matter anymore. I've been on big fleet engagements where there were command ships on the field, which is as it should be, and cant be too uncommon or I wouldn't have seen it. Offgrid fleet boosts dont appear to me to be as great a scourge to the epic quest for good fights you make it out to be, and you can just as easily park a CS in a pos or safe spot as you can a t3 booster. As far as rewarding time spend vs money spent, I can buy a character that flys command ships just as easily as I can a t3. At this point anything you want can be had quickly so talking about what it takes to get it is beside the point.

If you take the extra bonus away from the t3s, what do you give it that keeps it relevant as a fleet booster?


Something about not wanting to think about fleet roles. buying characters . . . Sorry, I gave up trying to break up your wall of text Ugh
Alsyth
#34 - 2011-11-15 14:48:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Alsyth
Off grid boosting had always been an issue, locals with T3 or CSs (or both) at a POS have too much of an advantage.
Why should it only become a problem with nullified cloaky unscannable T3s? Because they help roamers and not locals?


Getting rid of off-grid boosting would make fleet CS useful again, they are the only one able to bring many links on a battle while having a good tank.
T3s on the other hand are more specialized and can bring a single more powerful link with them, but they tank a little less and are more expensive (armor rapier-loki with 50km point and webs is awesome).
Both would have their use and they wouldn't compete each other too much.

Giving CSs the 5% bonus and T3s the 3% one would just make ganglinked T3s nearly useless, at a POS or on the field.


As for the other gangliked ships, Field CSs aren't used for their links anyway (NH can't fit them PG-wise, Astarte can't fit them slot-wise, Absolution PG-wise in most pvp fits, and Sleipnir is the only viable one), same for BCs (Myrm and Cane are the only one able to fit them without gimping their fit).
Forcing on-grid boosting would perhaps make them used again when you either don't want to field a 200+M ISK ship (then you use a BC) or when you really need their dps.
Same for capitals, they might use their hi-slots for boosts again if they can't have a remote boost or a good enough on grid booster.
Griznatch
Distinguished Gentleman's Boating Club
Domain Research and Mining Inst.
#35 - 2011-11-15 16:35:53 UTC
Lili Lu wrote:
Breaking up your wall of text

Griznatch wrote:

All of your proposed solutions will completely break the t3 gang link idea and make the subsystems useless.
No it won't. It would make the nullified unprobable T3 with 14 links impossible.

Griznatch wrote:
The t3s have to have something to offer that exceeds the command ships otherwise the CS is always the better option.
Whereas now the situation is reversed, T3s the better option. And without touching the current %s on-grid boosting would still leave T3 with a role, just not the same one.

Griznatch wrote:
Forcing boosting on grid and requiring you to tank your t3 booster to the point of only running 1 link is absurd. You could get nearly as much benefit from a BC with 1 link for a tiny fraction of the cost.
No, a BC does not have the same % boost.

Griznatch wrote:
Your comment about adding more to the makeup of fleets and boosters sounds ok for fleets of a hundred ships but a making a 10 man gang split up into 5 squads and bring 6 CS/T3 boosters to get what they can have right now will just make everyone grumpy and cause more problems than it solves. If it takes a maxed prober with implants and sisters gear to scan down an "unprobable" booster then that's what you need to bring if you're that worried about taking out someone's fleet booster. If they're parked in a pos then being hard to probe doesnt really matter anymore. I've been on big fleet engagements where there were command ships on the field, which is as it should be, and cant be too uncommon or I wouldn't have seen it. Offgrid fleet boosts dont appear to me to be as great a scourge to the epic quest for good fights you make it out to be, and you can just as easily park a CS in a pos or safe spot as you can a t3 booster. As far as rewarding time spend vs money spent, I can buy a character that flys command ships just as easily as I can a t3. At this point anything you want can be had quickly so talking about what it takes to get it is beside the point.

If you take the extra bonus away from the t3s, what do you give it that keeps it relevant as a fleet booster?


Something about not wanting to think about fleet roles. buying characters . . . Sorry, I gave up trying to break up your wall of text Ugh


Nullified unprobable t3s with 14 links is possible now? Who knew.

Off grid boosting is a seperate matter altogether so lets juat talk about t3 vs cs for a moment. Link me some fits and some numbers and show me how the t3s dominate the fleet boost scene. Without some actual data this is all a waste of time.

I used to have a clever sig but I lost it.
Alsyth
#36 - 2011-11-15 17:37:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Alsyth
Griznatch wrote:
Nullified unprobable t3s with 14 links is possible now? Who knew.

Off grid boosting is a seperate matter altogether so lets juat talk about t3 vs cs for a moment. Link me some fits and some numbers and show me how the t3s dominate the fleet boost scene. Without some actual data this is all a waste of time.


Typo, 4 links.

Legion and Loki dominate the fleetboost scene, Claymore and Damnation being second, Tengu and Vulture third. You can ignore Eos and Proteus, and Sleipnir, Myrmidon and Hurricane are probably more used than Vulture and Tengu (only on grid, ofc).

For pve (incursion), small/med gang pvp (on or offgrid), hi-sec wars, and offgrid POS boosts for locals at least.


Why? If you can't build the numbers yourself on EFT, the waste of time is your posting here.

Edit: besides, your "off/on grid is irrelevant to CS/T3 talk" shows how much you miss the point.
Griznatch
Distinguished Gentleman's Boating Club
Domain Research and Mining Inst.
#37 - 2011-11-15 17:58:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Griznatch
The title of the thread is what should ccp do about cs vs t3, not what ccp should do about offgrid boosters. All thats been said in this thread is "i feel this" and "i want this" and "i believe this", which amounts to one opinion vs another. If op wants anything changed, its gonna take more than a few "i think command ships should have a better"s to change minds. All I'm asking is for the op to provide some sort of data about the situation and some data about how thier proposed changes should work. Making drastic changes to game mechanicas based on opinions isnt gonna happen. Want a change? Prove that its needed.

I used to have a clever sig but I lost it.
Alexandria Aesirial
Fancypants Inc
Pandemic Horde
#38 - 2011-11-16 00:47:57 UTC
The current state of boosting is fine. Those who use alts to provide boosts will have a difficult time monitoring 2 accs at once and putting both in a tight situation.

It's only blobbing when you lose, otherwise it's good fleet comp.
To mare
Advanced Technology
#39 - 2011-11-16 00:52:13 UTC
Grimpak wrote:
gang boosting being only doable on grid would solve these problems.


+1 this is the only thing that need to be done
Diomidis
Pod Liberation Authority
#40 - 2011-11-16 02:08:20 UTC
It's funny that ppl refer to gangboosting "solo-ers" as game-breakers...

"Boosting their main to ridiculous levels"...com on...lol...

If you want to discuss about "fairness" and realism, instead of whining for "on-grid" boosting, solve non-stackable boosting first.

What I mean? Lets go trough this again (cause I've elaborated on it before):

Right now a single booster can uniformly boost any givnb size of fleet, as long as all the command positions are occupied by a toon with proper skills. You can have a booster CS or T3 boosting 2 players to say 15% better attributes per link, or the same ship can boost 200 players equally effective.

This "multitasking" ability is insanely unrealistic. If one T3 in a POS boosting a soloer is gamebreaking, what is a Titan or the same T3 boosting 50+ ships?

What is gamebreaking? Having 1-3 ships being 25% better, or having 100+ ships being 25% better?

Few are the chocking points in eve where the sov holder doesn't have boosters being online half + of the day - if not all day.

Am I suggesting that large gangs should have no bonuses? Off course not. But they should structure their fleets with way-way more boosters to receive even remotely the same bonuses = more boosters per ship.

For you silly blobbers and gankers, CCP gave the new Tier 3 BCs...
Having 30% of your fleet as logis is the norm for quite a few alliances / corps, so RR should not be a problem.
Now, if you want bonuses "on-grid", exactly because of the above you don't deserve nerfing small gangs even more.

Get a clue and help EVE-O survive.

"War does not determine who is right - only who is left." -- Bertrand Russell