Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Maybe I can't get CCP to get boosts to on-grid only, but hopefully we could see a very welcome change to small ship gang/fleet pvp.

I am proposing to utilize a T2 destroyer hull as a small-ship only link booster. A small form factor command ship, if you will. Battlecruisers were (based on ship text) supposed to be the anchor/booster for small ship fleets, but with the changes to warping, BCs are simply too slow to keep up with a rapidly-warping roaming fleet.

We need a ship that can move quickly with frigate roams and provide boosts. I suggest limiting its boosts to small ships only, so as not to overlap the Command ship role. Either small versions of the existing boost link modules with proportionally reduced PG and CPU numbers, or ship role bonuses reducing normal link PG and CPU to something can could fit on the ships properly. It would need to be a T2 hull, both for justifying the command ship level learning skills needed, and that such a ship on grid would need a proper T2 resist profile to survive, as the link ship would be primaried often.

Keep its agility and warp performance on par with frigates, and its on-grid velocity typical for dessy hulls. Weapon systems turret-based (my preference only) with combat damage performance ratio to t1 dessies to match existing command ship:BC ratio.

And if CCP could keep its boosts to on-grid only, I'd truly be happy.

There have been a few threads up about this. Though I must say, yours is simpler and more easy to like and not so convoluted.

If I would consider this, I woul reduce max links to 3 or even just 2 (including or forbidding command processors via role) but keep active running (because - visuals).
I am glad you agree on not touching the skills and therefore instead justify the T2 hull, something that usually destroys the argument or even is taken by the command destroyer concept hostage to justify nerfing the skill requirements, as so often.

And I would skip all the comamnd link bonusses so they will be a bit weaker then their big siblings. Having the option at all is enough as a trait and reduced CPU/PG is all you need from the Command Ship skill.

This is actually the first variation of ship sugestions I could play with.

Cheers


As an offgrid booster I would like to agree with you, but I can't and am not influenced by personal feelings. Further more has it already been stated, that they want to move boost on grid (just don't know how yet.) So there you are.
Whatever I do with my skills and fits in regards to links I usually consider ongrid, less to worrry and cry about, when it actually happens. You sound a bit like a earth/sphere denier.

Yeah.
Off-grid boosts are better - 8km/s condors and 11km/s garmurs should clearly be the standard for pretty much any form of relevance in this game. And why cry about it? All it takes is to learn a bunch of skills and have an alt. And in the meantime you can just dock up and station trade, or not play at all.

#eveiseasy

There's actually nothing in his post about training time. His concern was the lack of mobility for command ships.

I honestly wouldn't mind giving a destroyer access to one link similar to BC. Not specialized or any bonuses but still able to have them keep up.

I posted this idea while ago and it got some traction: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3709740#post3709740

...and yet CCP is working on this exact thing. Prepare your orifices, sir.

No, they're not.

What's your point?



I certainly never claimed CCP had any idea about what they're doing.

The ISD obviously disagrees with you.

This topic is clearly about the nature of links in general, it's even mentioned in the OP that his preference is removing off-grid links entirely.

The problem here is people who have never seriously engaged in PvP from the perspective of a small gang of 1-5 duking it out with 30-70 enemies at once. You can't even fathom doing that, it gets mocked because you have no idea how to do it.

Pro-tip, it will NEVER be done again if links are moved on grid without other changes, because 1-5 people can't support links, but 30-70 people can.

So maybe you feel better about yourself because when someone who can fly 1-5v30-70 kills you (because believe me, I can kill you with or without links, but the very existence of links necessitates that they be used by the small gang looking for every advantage/equalizer to roll with the blobs) does it without links, but now you've killed content for small gang pvpers. Congratulations.

This is honestly a very similar conversation to logi. Logistics ships can't be supported in a small gang of 1-5 people because you have too many more important roles to fill, such as point-holder and dps. Should logi be removed entirely? Nah, but logi, much like links, needs to be approached VERY differently than it is currently.

Really? 'Cause I could've sworn it was a suggestion for a T2 destroyer as a fleet booster that's more mobile to keep up with small, quick gangs (and possibly easier to train into, but 0h gn0z people get upset when we mention Command Ship training times apparently).