These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#261 - 2014-04-03 15:50:54 UTC
Yuri Antollare wrote:

13 pages?

Also sounds reasonable for a perfectly balanced part of the game.

lol.


I doubt theres any more than 13 posters in the entire thread.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#262 - 2014-04-03 16:52:53 UTC
I'd like to come at this from another direction. We've heard a lot of reasons why it's "OK" to have them of grid. I'd like to compile a list of why they "need" to be off grid.

Reasons boosting ships NEED to be off grid:

(I'm asking, so please - make me a list)
Vera El
Ironmongers
#263 - 2014-04-03 17:45:27 UTC
I think they should be forced to be on grid to boost to make them be at risk also. With the FW plex size limiting ships that can enter I would like to see a boosting ship that can enter the smaller plexes. For an example a Tier 2 dessie hull that can provide 1 or 2 boosts while still having some combat ability. Same for the cruiser class also.
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#264 - 2014-04-03 17:50:26 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Yuri Antollare wrote:

13 pages?

Also sounds reasonable for a perfectly balanced part of the game.

lol.


I doubt theres any more than 13 posters in the entire thread.


63
Courtney Gutierrez
Doomheim
#265 - 2014-04-03 18:13:12 UTC
Vera El wrote:
I think they should be forced to be on grid to boost to make them be at risk also. With the FW plex size limiting ships that can enter I would like to see a boosting ship that can enter the smaller plexes. For an example a Tier 2 dessie hull that can provide 1 or 2 boosts while still having some combat ability. Same for the cruiser class also.



This is such a ******** idea in any engagment it will be blapped off field first and therefore never used it would be just a waste of ccps time really
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome
#266 - 2014-04-03 22:51:26 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:
I'd like to come at this from another direction. We've heard a lot of reasons why it's "OK" to have them of grid. I'd like to compile a list of why they "need" to be off grid.

Reasons boosting ships NEED to be off grid:

(I'm asking, so please - make me a list)



Easy. Here are a few of the basic ones I have seen/heard and said myself before.

Reason 1:
Because CCP want an extra $15 a month from people.
If they go ongrid - CCP will take a huge financial hit and people will spend that $15 a month on new Steam games instead of Eve.

Reason 2:
Station games are all that Eve will be as it is the only play style that will suit ongrid boosting.

Reason 3:
The people who are complaining about boosts will just move on to something else and say it is 'unfair' instead of adapting and competing. That is the nature of the whinger.
They blame everyone else or 'the system' for their own failures and expect everyone else to change to make up for their shortcomings. Some misguided fools even think an MMO should be 'solo' when and if they choose.

Reason 4:
Some people might even feel that CCP has ripped them off and unsub all accounts.
They will see there is no point training anything long term or investing their play time in Eve as CCP could render it useless and all their toons unsaleable in the future.

Reason 5:
The single account 'solo' dreamer is not as valuable a customer as someone with multiple accounts who gives CCP more $$ each month.

I am sure others can come up with more reasons.

https://soundcloud.com/ibanezlaney
Damen Apol
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#267 - 2014-04-04 00:19:08 UTC
Reason 6. Links become a "blob only" ship, and kill off any utility they had for small-gang PvPers by being on-grid.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#268 - 2014-04-04 11:51:24 UTC
OK, I've boiled all that down to "I'm afraid to lose my ship"

Any different reasons?
Machiavelli's Nemesis
Angry Mustellid
#269 - 2014-04-04 13:06:44 UTC
Because the volume of tears generated by the continued existence of off-grid boosters is more than the amount of tears generated by the prospect of making them on-grid only. This is why we should keep the status quo.

The endless weepy threads on the subject still make a refreshing change to AFK cloaker whinethreads.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#270 - 2014-04-04 13:14:17 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:
OK, I've boiled all that down to "I'm afraid to lose my ship"

Any different reasons?


Non that you wont oversimplify and misrepresent, clearly.

Perhaps if all i did was camp gates and high sec ganks i would feel the same as you, who knows?
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#271 - 2014-04-04 13:33:11 UTC
Machiavelli's reason has merit. That is probably the one valid eve reason for off grid boosts.
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome
#272 - 2014-04-04 14:49:48 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:
OK, I've boiled all that down to "I'm afraid to lose my ship"

Any different reasons?



And this kids is why you should say no to drugs and frontal lobotomys.

https://soundcloud.com/ibanezlaney
Zeetchmen
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#273 - 2014-04-05 01:36:55 UTC
IbanezLaney wrote:
Serendipity Lost wrote:
OK, I've boiled all that down to "I'm afraid to lose my ship"

Any different reasons?



And this kids is why you should say no to drugs and frontal lobotomys.


She is right though. When it boils down to no links, no engaed its due to wanting broken mechanics to give you saftey. The flipside being they have off grind t3 booster alts lets not bother.

Off grid-links are toxic to engagements both ways. Although I do agree that I doubt CCP will do anything about it due to people paying for said edge
Damen Apol
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#274 - 2014-04-05 02:11:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Damen Apol
Zeetchmen wrote:
IbanezLaney wrote:
Serendipity Lost wrote:
OK, I've boiled all that down to "I'm afraid to lose my ship"

Any different reasons?



And this kids is why you should say no to drugs and frontal lobotomys.


She is right though. When it boils down to no links, no engaed its due to wanting broken mechanics to give you saftey. The flipside being they have off grind t3 booster alts lets not bother.

Off grid-links are toxic to engagements both ways. Although I do agree that I doubt CCP will do anything about it due to people paying for said edge


Joy, let us put them on grid so that blobs have unique access to them. Why should anyone who flies with less than 20 people have a chance anyway right?

I'd be fine with totally removing links, but putting them on-grid is only going to benefit the blob.
Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#275 - 2014-04-10 17:22:37 UTC
My opinion:

When links used by a small gang to wreck a blob = good.

When links used by solo pilots because they suck = bad.



It is a good and a bad thing. But mostly a bad thing.
Damen Apol
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#276 - 2014-04-10 23:25:50 UTC
Diesel47 wrote:
My opinion:

When links used by a small gang to wreck a blob = good.

When links used by solo pilots because they suck = bad.



It is a good and a bad thing. But mostly a bad thing.


Links don't turn a bad pilot into a good pilot I assure you. The solo pilots that suck still suck. Is it bad that they use links as a crutch? Yea, but you can still kill them because, again, they suck anyway.
Taoist Dragon
Okata Syndicate
#277 - 2014-04-11 00:21:10 UTC
Damen Apol wrote:
Diesel47 wrote:
My opinion:

When links used by a small gang to wreck a blob = good.

When links used by solo pilots because they suck = bad.



It is a good and a bad thing. But mostly a bad thing.


Links don't turn a bad pilot into a good pilot I assure you. The solo pilots that suck still suck. Is it bad that they use links as a crutch? Yea, but you can still kill them because, again, they suck anyway.


Not quite untrue.

When the links provide such a huge mechanical bonus the pilot doesn't have to be 'good' to completely stomp a decent pilot is a supposedly 1v1.

The main reason links will probably never be on grid is money pure and simple. CCP don't want to the revenue generated by the accounts for link alt.

Lets face it the argument about brink links on grid will only work for blobs. Well that won't actually change a great deal of activity associated with blobs now. All it will stop is the odd good pvp'er harassing the blobs and killing off stragglers.

The station games argument. Nothing will change as most people who play station games have OGB pretty much all the time anyway.

Lets face it if boosts came ongrid very little would change in the grand scheme of combat apart from having another high value target on the field. The tactics would slightly alter but in general not much else would.

OGB's are purely a money making exercise that a few people on either side of the arguments use to polish and wave their own epeens around.

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.
Taoist Dragon
Okata Syndicate
#278 - 2014-04-11 00:27:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Taoist Dragon
IbanezLaney wrote:
Serendipity Lost wrote:
I'd like to come at this from another direction. We've heard a lot of reasons why it's "OK" to have them of grid. I'd like to compile a list of why they "need" to be off grid.

Reasons boosting ships NEED to be off grid:

(I'm asking, so please - make me a list)



Easy. Here are a few of the basic ones I have seen/heard and said myself before.

Reason 1:
Because CCP want an extra $15 a month from people.
If they go ongrid - CCP will take a huge financial hit and people will spend that $15 a month on new Steam games instead of Eve.

Reason 2:
Station games are all that Eve will be as it is the only play style that will suit ongrid boosting.

Reason 3:
The people who are complaining about boosts will just move on to something else and say it is 'unfair' instead of adapting and competing. That is the nature of the whinger.
They blame everyone else or 'the system' for their own failures and expect everyone else to change to make up for their shortcomings. Some misguided fools even think an MMO should be 'solo' when and if they choose.

Reason 4:
Some people might even feel that CCP has ripped them off and unsub all accounts.
They will see there is no point training anything long term or investing their play time in Eve as CCP could render it useless and all their toons unsaleable in the future.

Reason 5:
The single account 'solo' dreamer is not as valuable a customer as someone with multiple accounts who gives CCP more $$ each month.

I am sure others can come up with more reasons.


Reason 1, 4 and 5 are the only reason boosts will stay off grid. Unless CCP decide to take the commercial risk (they won't)

Reason 2 and 3 are general things that happen all over eve since day 1 and will probably continue till eve shuts down. These have nothing to do with OGB per say.

OGB's are a fantastic commercial idea that CCP has taken full advantage off. They know this and any nerfs to them would probably just be substituted with something else that would get peoples backs up.

Serendipity - it has nothing whatsoever to do with losing ships. Expensive shite gets lost all the time. The risk averse among the playerbase will always want to protect their investment. it is purely a commercial activity by CCP and all the whining about it won't change that.

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#279 - 2014-04-11 15:29:54 UTC
I would prefer on grid, but would settle for an agression timer.

Is there anything wrong with getting an agro timer for aiding in combat?
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#280 - 2014-04-11 15:34:32 UTC
You can say it has nothing to do with losing ships and I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong.