These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[proposal] limit gang links to a single grid

First post
Author
Vertisce Soritenshi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#81 - 2011-11-15 19:41:10 UTC
Gevlin wrote:
Requiring the Command Boosting ship to be on greid is dumbing down the game

removes the role of the scan down ship for the planet hugger ship or removes the advantage of getting to the fight early and putting up a POS.

The Key is to adapt. - Possibly take out the Command Boosting ship before it makes it into system.
Trick you enemey to fight on YOUR terms. have the terrain on your side.

-1 I will not support dumbing down the game to a bunch of ships sitting on 1 grid and just calling primary.
A little hide and seek .


Wait...what? Requiring a ship in PvP to actually be in PvP is "dumbing down the game"? Really now?

To top it off your "solution" is to beat the other guys to the system and put up a POS first?

Holy ****...

Humanity is doomed.

Bounties for all! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2279821#post2279821

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#82 - 2011-11-15 20:01:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
The only reason this persists is CCP wants people to buy alts. However, for every alt they sell with their command links there are a bunch of people who think this sucks that we have to dual box alts in order to be competitive in this game. Now with t2 command links this will really suck for people who don't like to dual box alts.

And for those who say you need to scan down the boosters give me a break. Even if you were to redirect your attention from the pvp fight to try to start scanning the alt out, the alt boosters are aligned ready to warp out as soon as you show up on grid.

Increasing these bonuses without forcing the ships to at least be on grid is obviously a bad direction for the game.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#83 - 2011-11-15 20:26:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
King Rothgar wrote:
When solo, I ....with a loki booster alt. ..


Roll

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#84 - 2011-11-15 22:45:13 UTC
Hirana Yoshida wrote:
Solution?:
- Commandships have been needing a once-over for a while, increase the tank of the link platforms slightly and change what needs to be changed in regards to the links (Info Link "lolz").
- T3 Command subsystem changed to decrease signature slightly and allows for TWO links right off the bat.


The balance between the two is already there: T3 have much less tank than command ships. If the booster was required to be on-grid, the command ships would be better for multiple links, while T3s could use one or two links while still having tank/gank capability.
Zircon Dasher
#85 - 2011-11-15 22:52:41 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Increasing these bonuses is obviously a bad direction for the game.


FYP
Lol

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.

Talr Shiar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#86 - 2011-11-16 05:52:59 UTC
this gets a - from me, theres no reasno to break this legitmate mechanic. It would make command ships in capital fights completly usless. Becuase you would be for all intense and purposes OWNED as soon as you came on grid to give your captial ships boosts
Mag's
Azn Empire
#87 - 2011-11-16 12:54:54 UTC
It's a no thank you, from me.

If someone has a pos up, they took the time to do exactly that. Why shouldn't they then reap the benefits of this later in fights.

Also they fixed tech 3, just because you can't be arsed to probe them down is your problem and not the problem of the tech 3 ships, or gang links. They fitted to be harder to probe, you need to fit to find them. Sounds like balance to me.

It's not as if this isn't open for all. Why do you lot always insist this game be dumbed down and made so much easier?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Vertisce Soritenshi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#88 - 2011-11-16 14:51:35 UTC
Mag's wrote:
It's a no thank you, from me.

If someone has a pos up, they took the time to do exactly that. Why shouldn't they then reap the benefits of this later in fights.

Also they fixed tech 3, just because you can't be arsed to probe them down is your problem and not the problem of the tech 3 ships, or gang links. They fitted to be harder to probe, you need to fit to find them. Sounds like balance to me.

It's not as if this isn't open for all. Why do you lot always insist this game be dumbed down and made so much easier?


This all comes down to one simple fact. If any ship is giving bonuses to other ships in a fight then that ship should be required to be IN the fight. No ship participating in PvP combat should be completely immune from being killed. This means no warping around the system or hiding in a POS. You cant target another ship and fire from within a POS. Why should you be able to give bonuses from within one? Same goes for warping or even sitting still in another part of the system. Command links can effectively do more damage than the ship itself could by firing its own guns. Depends on how many other ships they are giving bonuses to. So if you want to let Command ships to continue to give bonuses without participating in the fight directly then I expect to be able to target and kill any ship within a POS and I expect to be able to do the same from within a POS.

Bounties for all! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2279821#post2279821

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#89 - 2011-11-16 15:12:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
Mag's wrote:
It's a no thank you, from me.

If someone has a pos up, they took the time to do exactly that. Why shouldn't they then reap the benefits of this later in fights.

Also they fixed tech 3, just because you can't be arsed to probe them down is your problem and not the problem of the tech 3 ships, or gang links. They fitted to be harder to probe, you need to fit to find them. Sounds like balance to me.

It's not as if this isn't open for all. Why do you lot always insist this game be dumbed down and made so much easier?



It seems we never agree. Smile

You think it would dumb the game down to require booster ships on the battle grid? I think that is a very hard case to make.

Lets say you have an idiot cousin. You decide to put him in a command ship or booster t3. Which do you think would be easier for this dumb relative:

1) to have to fly the ship on the grid where the battle is taking place
or
2) To have him sit at a pos or in a safe spot aligned out to warp if anyone shows up on a 200k dscan?

Please answer that.

Currenlty flying these booster ships where you don't even have to be on grid is so boring and easy no one would actually think of doing that with anything other than an alt you are multiboxing.

There is a difference between dumbing the game down and making it more tedious. Forcing people to multibox alts simply makes the game tedious and destroys any small semblance of immersion the game has.

Sure some people are so concerned about looking like a hero on the killboards that they will suffer through this immersion breaking tedium, but that is not good for the game. (these boosting ships don't show up on the killmail - which they should) Those who don't want eve to be a chore will quickly find that it is no longer for them.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#90 - 2011-11-16 20:39:53 UTC
Mag's wrote:
...If someone has a pos up, they took the time to do exactly that. Why shouldn't they then reap the benefits of this later in fights.

If POS were complicated, demanding, expensive and required player skill to set up then yes, most definitely, the owners deserve the <2 days worth of absolute immunity for their links .... not the case though .. and now POS are getting dumbed down to boot.
Mag's wrote:
Also they fixed tech 3, just because you can't be arsed to probe them down is your problem and not the problem of the tech 3 ships, or gang links. They fitted to be harder to probe, you need to fit to find them. Sounds like balance to me.

You done a lot of combat probing after the change? Sure, it is theoretically doable provided you have maxed skills and/or implants + sisters gear .. if the T3 has deep'ish safe spots you are screwed though as it will take ages to get anywhere near it.
If range was limited to <1-2AU or so then "they can be probed!!!!1111" would be a very valid argument, but that is also not the case/

Just brain farted some alternate ways of 'handling' it:
- Cheap, readily available and easily fitted/run module that blocks all communications from off-grid. Hard counter to off-grid links.
- Link interference #1. Disables the use of directional scanner while links are active, cycle time increased to two minutes to prevent rapid cycling/scanning.
- Link interference #2. Active links disrupt shield harmonics causing POS bubbles to "harden" making them impassable by everyone but the link ship, any ship inside will be bounced as if the PW was changed (should open door for some quality laughs/griefing).
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#91 - 2011-11-16 23:20:24 UTC
Mag's wrote:
If someone has a pos up, they took the time to do exactly that. Why shouldn't they then reap the benefits of this later in fights.


POSes already influence fights through cyno jammers, jump bridges, weapon & EWAR batteries. If you want to benefit from a POS during a fight, bring the fight to the POS.

Off-grid boosters allow an AFK player to influence combat. In what bizarro world does this make sense? In the meantime I am of course training my alt to fly a 6-link tengu to boost incursion fleets. Am I a hypocrite? Certainly. Am I going to exploit any valid game mechanics to my advantage? Of course!

At some later point in time that alt will be flying a Tengu or Loki on-grid, providing boosts and combat capability. Of course I'd really love to be able to provide siege/skirmish warfare links on-grid with a shield tanking drone boat, but we can't always get what we want :)

PS: if CCP is watching, I'd love a Rattlesnake or Dominix which can mount warfare links, or a sleipnir with 5 medium drones. Perhaps a "siege/skirmish/armor/information warfare processor retrofit" rig which provides the warfare link bonus that battlecruisers enjoy, allowing battleships to be retrofitted with a gang link?
Julia Connor
P R O M E T H E U S
From Anoikis
#92 - 2011-11-16 23:36:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Julia Connor
I have only three words for this proposition. NO ******* WAY!

I can see where you are coming from and this is the same attitude almost everyone has towards supercaps and CO. which is understandable but it pisses me off most of the time. If I can't do it then no one else should. I for one run exploration sites and I use an offgrid boosting alt. This proposition requires me to fly 2 accs at the same time just to get bonuses so whoever wants to gank me can get the advantage. NO ******* WAY!
Il Feytid
State War Academy
Caldari State
#93 - 2011-11-17 00:43:28 UTC
**** grid only gang links. I would not be opposed to not allowing gang links to be active inside a force field though.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#94 - 2011-11-17 04:41:44 UTC
Julia Connor wrote:
I for one run exploration sites and I use an offgrid boosting alt. This proposition requires me to fly 2 accs at the same time just to get bonuses so whoever wants to gank me can get the advantage. NO ******* WAY!


You're already flying two accounts to get the bonuses, the only difference is they now both require attention.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#95 - 2011-11-17 07:35:00 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Mag's wrote:
If someone has a pos up, they took the time to do exactly that. Why shouldn't they then reap the benefits of this later in fights.


POSes already influence fights through cyno jammers, jump bridges, weapon & EWAR batteries. If you want to benefit from a POS during a fight, bring the fight to the POS.



So you actually have no problem at all with a genuinely invulnerable gang boosting ship in a POS participating in a fight, but you're complaining about a totally probeable ship doing the same?

OK

You know those horribly vulnerable, untanked "safe"spotted T3s are not cheap at all. Spend some ISK of your own and probe them out. You don't even have to risk your prober since the safespotted T3s are unarmed.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#96 - 2011-11-17 07:36:18 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Julia Connor wrote:
I for one run exploration sites and I use an offgrid boosting alt. This proposition requires me to fly 2 accs at the same time just to get bonuses so whoever wants to gank me can get the advantage. NO ******* WAY!


You're already flying two accounts to get the bonuses, the only difference is they now both require attention.


If someone's genuinely not paying attention to their 800M ISK ship, then you're looking at an easy kill.

Bring a dictor, because you may have noticed those skirmish mindlinks going past the 100M mark lately.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Mag's
Azn Empire
#97 - 2011-11-17 09:28:45 UTC
Vertisce Soritenshi wrote:
This all comes down to one simple fact.......
That's not a fact, it's an opinion.

Cearain wrote:
It seems we never agree. Smile

You think it would dumb the game down to require booster ships on the battle grid? I think that is a very hard case to make.
We may agree on something in the future, who knows. Big smile

Rather than asking questions 1 & 2, you need to ask the correct ones.

1. Should someone be able to fit a tech 3 to work off grid?
2. Should a corp gain the benefits from a pos they took the time to install?
3. Do all these options have a counter and are they open to all?

You lot are basically saying: "We don't want to be bothered with finding tech3 or fitting/equipping ourselves for the task. Therefore we think CCP should nerf it."

Oh and this idea will make it more tedious, not less. (That was a weak argument to bring tbh)

Hirana Yoshida wrote:
If POS were complicated, demanding, expensive and required player skill to set up then yes, most definitely, the owners deserve the <2 days worth of absolute immunity for their links .... not the case though .. and now POS are getting dumbed down to boot.
If they are so easy, you put one up and reap the benefits too.
The interaction of fuelling the pos is being made easier. But as you have to build the fuel blocks, you can hardly claim it as being dumbed down.

Hirana Yoshida wrote:
You done a lot of combat probing after the change? Sure, it is theoretically doable.........
There is nothing theoretical about it, you just need to equip accordingly. Rather like the tech 3 ship has.

Mara Rinn wrote:
Off-grid boosters allow an AFK player to influence combat. In what bizarro world does this make sense? In the meantime I am of course training my alt to fly a 6-link tengu to boost incursion fleets. Am I a hypocrite? Certainly. Am I going to exploit any valid game mechanics to my advantage? Of course!
Roll

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Neo Agricola
Gallente Federation
#98 - 2011-11-17 09:58:26 UTC
I'm against it.

Why: Because:
1) this request is a "I want you to play eve the way i play it" request
2) it will affect Missionrunners, Miners and Incursion players as well.

DISSONANCE is recruiting Members: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=706442#post706442 Black-Mark Alliance Recruitment: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=6710

Vertisce Soritenshi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#99 - 2011-11-17 14:07:25 UTC
The arguing about this is just stupid now. CCP has enough common sense. Mark my words...this WILL be corrected in the future. Predicting it now with my psychic mojo.

Bounties for all! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2279821#post2279821

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#100 - 2011-11-17 14:43:22 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Cearain wrote:
It seems we never agree. Smile
You think it would dumb the game down to require booster ships on the battle grid? I think that is a very hard case to make.


We may agree on something in the future, who knows. Big smile
Rather than asking questions 1 & 2, you need to ask the correct ones.

1. Should someone be able to fit a tech 3 to work off grid?
2. Should a corp gain the benefits from a pos they took the time to install?
3. Do all these options have a counter and are they open to all?.......



You did not answer my questions so I will take it you admit it does not dumb down the game to require link ships to be on grid. In fact its pretty brainless when they are not on grid at a safe. However I will still answer yours because they are easy.

1) It can work but it's work should not directly influence a battle that is happening on grid.
2) Yes and I am not suggesting we remove every reason to build a pos.
3) Yes it has a counter. The counter is the immersion breaking “eve is a chore” option of dragging an alt around yourself and multiboxing your combat so you can compete. That option sucks. The other “counters” don't work well as explained above.

Mag's wrote:

You lot are basically saying: "We don't want to be bothered with finding tech3 or fitting/equipping ourselves for the task. Therefore we think CCP should nerf it."


No I am saying everyone seems to agree that no one really uses these ships with their main. People who use them are multi-boxing. I am saying that, for me and many others, that completely breaks the immersion of this game and makes it more of a chore than fun.

CCP is now boosting these alts with new tech 2 links wich will make a bad situation worse, for everyone who just wants to have some fun with eve and not treat it as a job. After the bonuses people who do not have these alts will simply not be competitive and so will not engage in pvp.

Yes I realize that ccp likely thinks it would be great to force everyone who wants to be competitive to pay for an additional account and multibox pvp. However, I think this is very short sighted. I for one refuse to do this in pvp. Now that these links are so damn powerful I may not be able to pvp any longer at least not solo like I normally do.

Moreover I bet allot of people who keep dragging these alts around will get tired of eve as well. Sure not all of them. There are a few in this game that are such drones they would do anything regardless of how tiresome and lame. But there will be more than a few who get sick of it . Yet they will still realize that if they don’t others will have a huge advantage in pvp and therefore they will burn out.
Mag's wrote:
[
Oh and this idea will make it more tedious, not less. (That was a weak argument to bring tbh)

You think flying ships on grid during a pvp battle is tedious??

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815