These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Are Links Too Much?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Hrett
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2014-02-19 19:30:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Hrett
Deen Wispa wrote:
Crosi, Yuri, Ibanez all make fair points. I guess at the end of the day, it comes down to the ethos you come to believe in when playing this game.

Crosi and Ibanez's ethos is: "Eve is not fair. So deal with it" Or something to that effect

Yuri's : "I prefer a challenge" Or something to that effect.

Everything else in this thread reads something to the effect of, "Well, you guys started using links or blobbing us first. So we decided to bring links now to counter your links/blobbing"

Which begs the rhetorical question of, which came first? The blob to counter the links? Or the links to counter the blob?




This. I hate links and think they are unfair and gamebreaking bullshit. Put them on-grid and I have absolutely zero problem with them. Right now - they are terribly broken and anyone who claims otherwise is delusional, full of ****, or both.

That being said - as long as CCP encourages them (and they do - their line of "they are really hard to fix" is the weakest excuse I have ever heard - they arent fixed because of the extra account cash it generates), then I dont have a problem with people using them. In fact, you would be quite stupid not to do so (count me as stupid - I have a link character and he flys a freighter).

The real issue here is CCP. They need to fix them. They wont. Cashgrab. End of story. I guess I cant blame them for it, but I dont have to agree with it.

spaceship, Spaceship, SPACESHIP!
Princess Nexxala
Zero Syndicate
#42 - 2014-02-19 19:40:38 UTC
One question to the link haters, say I have HG snakes in my head...and get more speed out of that, is that game breaking as well? Or is that okay because it cost me 3b isk? Or because there is more risk involved? Just curious what everyone thinks.

nom nom
Hrett
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#43 - 2014-02-19 19:46:57 UTC
Princess Nexxala wrote:
One question to the link haters, say I have HG snakes in my head...and get more speed out of that, is that game breaking as well? Or is that okay because it cost me 3b isk? Or because there is more risk involved? Just curious what everyone thinks.


Those dont force you to buy a second account and are at (minor) risk when you enter the battlefield. I personally have no problem with them.

spaceship, Spaceship, SPACESHIP!
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#44 - 2014-02-19 20:08:29 UTC
Princess Nexxala wrote:
One question to the link haters, say I have HG snakes in my head...and get more speed out of that, is that game breaking as well? Or is that okay because it cost me 3b isk? Or because there is more risk involved? Just curious what everyone thinks.


I'm absolutely fine with implants. They come with you into battle. I have four rather expensive clones for various purposes. If you screw up you can lose them. There are also an increase in smart bombing BS as of late.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#45 - 2014-02-19 20:32:16 UTC
Overall, off grid fleet boosters are much too overpowered in this game. The "force multiplying" advantages of being in a fleet are strong enough (Leadership skill bonuses, overall numbers, fleet warps, warp to, etc...).

Fleet boosters affect an entire group of players which is OK, but the boosts they receive are ridiculously high for a game built on "diminishing returns".

This game is supposed to be about diminishing returns, not overwhelming returns. +5% damage for an implant that costs alot of isk? OK with it. Minor (but significant) advantage. Snake set, Slave Set, Spur Set? OK with it. They are expensive and affect a single player.

In any case, we still fight with and without fleet boosters all the time. We think we're better than we really are when they are turned on, but we don't rely on them like a crutch when they aren't.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#46 - 2014-02-19 20:42:20 UTC
Princess Nexxala wrote:
One question to the link haters, say I have HG snakes in my head...and get more speed out of that, is that game breaking as well? Or is that okay because it cost me 3b isk? Or because there is more risk involved? Just curious what everyone thinks.


I feel very similar to Hrett.

They alter one character's attributes, not a full fleet of characters.
They are at reasonable risk of being lost.

And also, you can only use 1 pirate implant set at a time. With links, you can simultaneously combine the effects:
Rapid Deployment is better than a Full Snake Set: +30% speed (vs 24%)
Evasive Manuevers is better than a full Halo Set: -34% Sig radius (vs 20%)
Interdiction Manuevers is like upgrading all T2 tackle to best faction tackle.

Recon Operation is better than a Full Centurion Set: +34% EWAR Optimal Range (vs 33%)
Sensor Integrity is similar to gaining a Full Grail/Jackal/Talon/Spur Set: + 51% Sensor Strength.
Electronic Superiority is like upgrading all Paints, Damps, Tracks, and ECM to best Faction EWAR mods.

Shield Harmonizing gives as good a boost as a Low Grade Crystal Set: (+33%)
Passive defense gives as good a boost as a Low Grade Slave Set: (+33%)

Combine all 3 Siege or Armor Links, and the boost is much better than you gain from Highgrade crystal or Slave sets.

Pirate implants are potent, but you can't mix and match and put in 3 or 6 or 9 sets at the same time. I like pirate sets, and think they are perfectly acceptable. I consider them very potent... but reasonable given the risk and reward.

Off grid links have less risk, benefit many, many more players, and generally provide boosts much better than pirate implant sets. This is why I consider them broken. Put them on grid, and I'm alright with them.

Why?
On grid, the number of links that a single ship can push are minimized, as fitting lots of links is very fitting intensive.
On grid, they can be neutralized (neuts), not to mention destroyed or driven off grid.
On grid, and the character utilizing the links will actually be playing the game!
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#47 - 2014-02-19 20:44:46 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
I could go on, but links simply trump the bonuses you get from skills and implants and faction modules. Truthfully though, I'm alright with their strength, as long as you hold up the mantra that "EvE is not a 1v1 game".

Put the ******* links on Grid, and bring them into the combat. If your ship is boosting your fleetmates to such a level, they absolutely need to be "at risk". I applaud CCP for moving them outside of a POS FF, but until they are on grid, they are broken.
Agree with everything you say except one thing. Fleet boosters bonuses are too high regardless of whether or not they are on grid. They should be in the 5% range, not the 25% range.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#48 - 2014-02-19 20:52:41 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
I could go on, but links simply trump the bonuses you get from skills and implants and faction modules. Truthfully though, I'm alright with their strength, as long as you hold up the mantra that "EvE is not a 1v1 game".

Put the ******* links on Grid, and bring them into the combat. If your ship is boosting your fleetmates to such a level, they absolutely need to be "at risk". I applaud CCP for moving them outside of a POS FF, but until they are on grid, they are broken.
Agree with everything you say except one thing. Fleet boosters bonuses are too high regardless of whether or not they are on grid. They should be in the 5% range, not the 25% range.


If they remain off grid, I fully support the nerf from 20-35% boosts all the way down to 2-7% boosts. It still takes a player to fly and utilize the ship. If they are on grid, I support having them be battle-changing ships. A logistics ship, EWAR ships, are very much force multipliers, just like link ships. Link ships give up a fair amount of combat power to boost the effectiveness of their fleet mates, so I'm alright with them having very strong boosts, as long as they are on grid!

IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome
#49 - 2014-02-19 21:04:10 UTC
Princess Nexxala wrote:
One question to the link haters, say I have HG snakes in my head...and get more speed out of that, is that game breaking as well? Or is that okay because it cost me 3b isk? Or because there is more risk involved? Just curious what everyone thinks.



I have asked the same question before and people seem to think implants are OK.

However implants do not cost more in reality - The sub time to max skill a booster alt + ships + mindlinks and constantly subbing a 2nd account makes boosts much more costly.

https://soundcloud.com/ibanezlaney
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#50 - 2014-02-19 21:20:32 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
I could go on, but links simply trump the bonuses you get from skills and implants and faction modules. Truthfully though, I'm alright with their strength, as long as you hold up the mantra that "EvE is not a 1v1 game".

Put the ******* links on Grid, and bring them into the combat. If your ship is boosting your fleetmates to such a level, they absolutely need to be "at risk". I applaud CCP for moving them outside of a POS FF, but until they are on grid, they are broken.
Agree with everything you say except one thing. Fleet boosters bonuses are too high regardless of whether or not they are on grid. They should be in the 5% range, not the 25% range.


A second player - when actively flown! - should be able to bring more to the table then one dude even with pimped out implants. I agree with on grid but the power level is fine.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#51 - 2014-02-19 21:34:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Gizznitt Malikite
IbanezLaney wrote:
Princess Nexxala wrote:
One question to the link haters, say I have HG snakes in my head...and get more speed out of that, is that game breaking as well? Or is that okay because it cost me 3b isk? Or because there is more risk involved? Just curious what everyone thinks.



I have asked the same question before and people seem to think implants are OK.

However implants do not cost more in reality - The sub time to max skill a booster alt + ships + mindlinks and constantly subbing a 2nd account makes boosts much more costly.


Horseshit.

Legion Boosting Toon: 7.5b
Command Ship Boosting Toon: 22b
CS/T3 Boosting Toon: 25b

So, lets imagine you bling it out and buy the 25b isk leadership toon, and put him in a 6 link CS orbiting your POS (+1b).

Option 1: 27b isk Total, spending 2.5b isk per implant set to give 10 people in fleet a full snake set, +250m spend giving them all republic fleet warp disruptors and fed navy webs.

Option 2: 26b isk Total, spending 25b isk buying the top-of-the-line leaderhip toon, +1b isk to implant and ship him, and provide everyone in fleet the same boosts as a full snake set, make their t2 modules function as effectively as the bling tackle, give them the benefits of a full Halo Set, and give them the benefits of a full crystal set.

Oh yeah, Option 2, you'll lose at most 1b isk for the ship/pod if it dies, but it orbits just outside of shields at deathstar POS. With option 1, everytime you lose a ship/pod, you lose 2+b isk.

Oops, forgot to add the second account in... That's 500m extra a month. Hmm... if Option 1 loses 1 ship/pod a month, your still way ahead.

Now that you understand the reality of the situation, try that again! Which option is more expensive?
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome
#52 - 2014-02-20 01:06:02 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
IbanezLaney wrote:
Princess Nexxala wrote:
One question to the link haters, say I have HG snakes in my head...and get more speed out of that, is that game breaking as well? Or is that okay because it cost me 3b isk? Or because there is more risk involved? Just curious what everyone thinks.



I have asked the same question before and people seem to think implants are OK.

However implants do not cost more in reality - The sub time to max skill a booster alt + ships + mindlinks and constantly subbing a 2nd account makes boosts much more costly.


Horseshit.

Legion Boosting Toon: 7.5b
Command Ship Boosting Toon: 22b
CS/T3 Boosting Toon: 25b

So, lets imagine you bling it out and buy the 25b isk leadership toon, and put him in a 6 link CS orbiting your POS (+1b).

Option 1: 27b isk Total, spending 2.5b isk per implant set to give 10 people in fleet a full snake set, +250m spend giving them all republic fleet warp disruptors and fed navy webs.

Option 2: 26b isk Total, spending 25b isk buying the top-of-the-line leaderhip toon, +1b isk to implant and ship him, and provide everyone in fleet the same boosts as a full snake set, make their t2 modules function as effectively as the bling tackle, give them the benefits of a full Halo Set, and give them the benefits of a full crystal set.

Oh yeah, Option 2, you'll lose at most 1b isk for the ship/pod if it dies, but it orbits just outside of shields at deathstar POS. With option 1, everytime you lose a ship/pod, you lose 2+b isk.

Oops, forgot to add the second account in... That's 500m extra a month. Hmm... if Option 1 loses 1 ship/pod a month, your still way ahead.

Now that you understand the reality of the situation, try that again! Which option is more expensive?



I was not taking lost pods or buying toons into account. I was more along the lines of if the toon was trained and kept subbed in the future.

Also - as you have just shown by conjuring up a 10 person fleet to validate your point - the figures can be bent in any way you or I desire.
I can simply say - nah I mostly fly alone so why would I need to calculate in 10 sets of implants ?

As I trained my alt and do not buy toons - the money on subbing it, skill books ,ships and keeping it subbed for the years to come - easily outweigh a 3 bil set of implants.

From my perspective:
3Bil isk is maybe the value of approx 6 months of game sub.
Just training the toon took maybe 8ish months - Then its 500mil a month for however long I keep it.

So for me its isk cost with ships, implants etc is maybe at 6-8bil by now. (likely more tbh)

As previously said- getting podded was not taken into account. No one cant predict how often that cost will arise if at all.
The implants are at more risk being on grid - I don't deny that. But the high grade sets are way more powerful than links so you get more advantage for that risk as well.
The real issue is when you combine high grades and links. That is crazy stuff. (10km a sec + hookbills etc)


I can understand that many players in eve want their advantages of High Grade snakes, crystals etc and for as few people as possible to be able to compete with them by using boosts. That is simply caused by a false senses of entitlement on their part. To argue that one douchy game mechanic is better or more valid than another is pointless.


But the reality is:
As I have said before. Everyone who plays eve is a douche.
I am and all of you are too.

No one of us is any better than the other.
I might be a douche and use boosts sometimes - You might be one who over ships, outnumbers and/or uses high grade implants to take part in your form of douchery.

Looking forward to links going ongrid myself. Back to one account, saving a few $ a month (which steam will somehow get I am sure lol) and being able to play in proper Full Screen all the time again will be nice.




So the tl;dr is - Boosts are more expensive unless you derp expensive pods cause derping consistently will eventually become more expensive. (surprise surprise)

https://soundcloud.com/ibanezlaney
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#53 - 2014-02-20 02:08:42 UTC
IbanezLaney wrote:

I was not taking lost pods or buying toons into account. I was more along the lines of if the toon was trained and kept subbed in the future.

Also - as you have just shown by conjuring up a 10 person fleet to validate your point - the figures can be bent in any way you or I desire.
I can simply say - nah I mostly fly alone so why would I need to calculate in 10 sets of implants ?

As I trained my alt and do not buy toons - the money on subbing it, skill books ,ships and keeping it subbed for the years to come - easily outweigh a 3 bil set of implants.

From my perspective:
3Bil isk is maybe the value of approx 6 months of game sub.
Just training the toon took maybe 8ish months - Then its 500mil a month for however long I keep it.

So for me its isk cost with ships, implants etc is maybe at 6-8bil by now. (likely more tbh)

As previously said- getting podded was not taken into account. No one cant predict how often that cost will arise if at all.
The implants are at more risk being on grid - I don't deny that. But the high grade sets are way more powerful than links so you get more advantage for that risk as well.
The real issue is when you combine high grades and links. That is crazy stuff. (10km a sec + hookbills etc)


I can understand that many players in eve want their advantages of High Grade snakes, crystals etc and for as few people as possible to be able to compete with them by using boosts. That is simply caused by a false senses of entitlement on their part. To argue that one douchy game mechanic is better or more valid than another is pointless.


But the reality is:
As I have said before. Everyone who plays eve is a douche.
I am and all of you are too.

No one of us is any better than the other.
I might be a douche and use boosts sometimes - You might be one who over ships, outnumbers and/or uses high grade implants to take part in your form of douchery.

Looking forward to links going ongrid myself. Back to one account, saving a few $ a month (which steam will somehow get I am sure lol) and being able to play in proper Full Screen all the time again will be nice.


So the tl;dr is - Boosts are more expensive unless you derp expensive pods cause derping consistently will eventually become more expensive. (surprise surprise)


I'm glad to hear you are in the bring links on grid camp. I want to correct two misnomers in your post though:

1) You are factually incorrect when you say, " But the high grade sets are way more powerful than links so you get more advantage for that risk as well." This is generally untrue in almost every case where stats are comparable:
Example High grade snakes boost your ship speed 24.73%. Rapid deployment boosts your ship speed by 30.19%.

Example: A crystal set increases your effective rep amount by 53.63%
A Shield Harmonizing increases your effective rep amount by 34.92%, but when combined with Active shielding (which also increases your effective rep amount by 34.92%), you have a net increase of 82% in effective rep amounts. This is greater than your 54%.

Slave Implants don't have a direct comparison to links, increasing your armor EHP by 50%, and the closest is Passive Defense which increases your armor EHP by 34%, but offers a shitload more benefit than slaves. Slaves simply increase your buffer, Passive Defense increases your resists which make you rep better and make you receive remote rep better, both of which are generally more desirable than a straight boost to buffer!

My point, generally fleet boosts are more powerful than pirate implants.

2.) Gang links effect an ENTIRE FLEET. If you nerf gang lnks so they only affect on other fleet member, we can look at it in the "But I solo wiith links" viewpoint. Just because we don't utilize them to boost 250 pilots doesn't mean we get to discount their ability to boost 250 pilots! They are very often used to boost large numbers of players, and that is one of the reasons they are much more broken than pirate implants.

And you are absolutely right, combing pirate implants with links produces some pretty insane ****. Rattlesnakes that can tank 3 dreadnaughts long enough to deagress and dock up, and crazy things like that.


Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2014-02-20 02:12:58 UTC
You know you've chosen a good place to live (gal/cal warzone) when...

friends & enemies agree on the proper way to blow eachother up (on-grid boosts).

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Yuri Antollare
Moira.
#55 - 2014-02-20 06:56:24 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Yuri Antollare wrote:

Literacy... ain't it a *****. Did I say get rid of links? Just passing comment on the type that are glued to them, bit defensive no?

*... paragraphs of drivel ...*



Literacy error is not the correct category, even if i was accusing you of something you did not say. That would be a reading comprehension error.

Much like every single wierd strawman paragraph in your post lol.

You cant get irate when someone (who didnt) accuses you of saying something you didnt then follow it up with several arguments they didnt say. Well, not without looking a bit silly anyway lol.

You are suggesting that people who use boosts are bad. Im just correctly asserting that you are just another tedious uppity dude that thinks the way you play this game is the best.


Literacy is the ability to read and write, you respond to something I didn't write, you have a literacy issue or something worse. Your not even being pedantic, just wrong.

I'm ignoring your second line as the amount of double negatives obscures what you're trying to say. The guy flying into 20 dudes solo, no I don't think he's bad for using links. The guy that doesnt shut em down so he can obliterate usually equal competition? Yes he is indeed a bad, or he's at least afraid he would lose otherwise.

This isn't about what I think is the best way to play, I know what CCP thinks. Fact is you were 'fine' with boosts before the developer had to nerf them, so what you think is fine is near objectively proven to be wrong. The fact that CCP clearly will continue revisiting them should mean something to you too, probably won't though.

Me? When I know the mechanic has got to the point the developer has to fix it, and further fixes are waiting on technical solutions, I'm not going to abuse that fact just so I can get some kills.

Thats just me though, when something is OP in a game (especially when the devs say they will revisit it) I'm not going to go near it. Especially when it is one of the most blatant P2W mechanis in gaming history.

We can't all be good people though obviously.



IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome
#56 - 2014-02-20 07:56:32 UTC
Yuri Antollare wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Yuri Antollare wrote:

Literacy... ain't it a *****. Did I say get rid of links? Just passing comment on the type that are glued to them, bit defensive no?

*... paragraphs of drivel ...*



Literacy error is not the correct category, even if i was accusing you of something you did not say. That would be a reading comprehension error.

Much like every single wierd strawman paragraph in your post lol.

You cant get irate when someone (who didnt) accuses you of saying something you didnt then follow it up with several arguments they didnt say. Well, not without looking a bit silly anyway lol.

You are suggesting that people who use boosts are bad. Im just correctly asserting that you are just another tedious uppity dude that thinks the way you play this game is the best.


Literacy is the ability to read and write, you respond to something I didn't write, you have a literacy issue or something worse. Your not even being pedantic, just wrong.

I'm ignoring your second line as the amount of double negatives obscures what you're trying to say. The guy flying into 20 dudes solo, no I don't think he's bad for using links. The guy that doesnt shut em down so he can obliterate usually equal competition? Yes he is indeed a bad, or he's at least afraid he would lose otherwise.

This isn't about what I think is the best way to play, I know what CCP thinks. Fact is you were 'fine' with boosts before the developer had to nerf them, so what you think is fine is near objectively proven to be wrong. The fact that CCP clearly will continue revisiting them should mean something to you too, probably won't though.

Me? When I know the mechanic has got to the point the developer has to fix it, and further fixes are waiting on technical solutions, I'm not going to abuse that fact just so I can get some kills.

Thats just me though, when something is OP in a game (especially when the devs say they will revisit it) I'm not going to go near it. Especially when it is one of the most blatant P2W mechanis in gaming history.

We can't all be good people though obviously.






I blame Khan for this Gallente drama.
CoolBig smileSmileLolP

https://soundcloud.com/ibanezlaney
Destination SkillQueue
Doomheim
#57 - 2014-02-20 20:16:39 UTC
One time bump to fix forum.
Sean Parisi
Blackrise Vanguard
#58 - 2014-02-22 13:44:04 UTC
I dont need links. Links are for people who login, I simply forum pvp.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#59 - 2014-02-23 03:12:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
I know a lot of responses have suggested on grid boosters as the way to go.

I may get flamed for this, but I think it's fine just the way it is.

I haven't been playing long enough to have a links boosting character (and haven't purchased one on the bazaar), so I don't run links myself and only have access to them when in fleet.

However, despite it being a pain in the backside to come up against someone who is being boosted, I can appreciate the time, effort and training that goes into creating a good boosting character.

We all have the ability to create links characters, so others shouldn't be penalized just because I haven't gone to the same level of effort as someone else.
Whim Aqayn
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#60 - 2014-02-23 10:34:35 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
I want the game to be pay 2 win.