These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Giving Gang Links a Warpable Beacon
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ncc 1709
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Pandemic Horde
#21 - 2014-10-23 10:41:19 UTC
-1
this would force boosters off grid simply because their fleet wont want a beacon that gives their position away
Lelob
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#22 - 2014-10-23 12:18:09 UTC
Thoughts are: you are terrible at this game and need to learn how to probe.
Tikitina
Doomheim
#23 - 2014-10-23 14:37:06 UTC
Lets also give all Outlaws and Suspects a warp beacon in both HisSec and LowSec.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#24 - 2014-10-23 14:49:37 UTC
Arronicus wrote:
-1, because this does not solve the issue it seeks to. Creating a beacon, ignoring the annoyances that would cause, and the way it would be used to harass the general playerbase by groups of command ships in jita all flicking their 'beacon' on and off (Yes, it would happen. Yes, I would bring my 4 command ships to the beacon protest), would:


  • Be of little benefit if the linker is sat on the edge of a pos bubble or station, where he's not in any danger anyway
  • Highlight targets on grid who are linking, allowing gangs to easily see who they should be shooting
  • Devalue the benefit in running a ganglink on your battlecruiser, as now it would be obvious that you are, and make you a bigger target
  • Create additional clutter


Now, the whole reason I'm posting isn't to be negative, but rather because I don't think this is a good idea, so I'll propose an amendment;

Cause ganglinks, when active, to apply a massive penalty to being probed out, allowing them to be very easy to probe out while boosting, even with loads of ECCM fit. Some sort of idea around the probes being able to lock onto the ganglink communications from the ship.

This, I agree with all of the points.

Also lets not forget the part where skirmish gangs get effectively killed off because inties can warp off and on and always tackle the kiting ganglink in any kind of setup while armor/blob brawls just bring a damn damnation and keep its 1m ehp fat ass alive.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Phaade
Know-Nothings
Negative Feedback
#25 - 2014-10-23 16:39:42 UTC
In addition, the link ship should become suspect. It should also add a 60 second combat timer (can't jump through gates or dock).

You want links for your ships to shoot me, I get to shoot your link ship on gates and stations.
Phaade
Know-Nothings
Negative Feedback
#26 - 2014-10-23 16:41:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Phaade
Arya Regnar wrote:
Arronicus wrote:
-1, because this does not solve the issue it seeks to. Creating a beacon, ignoring the annoyances that would cause, and the way it would be used to harass the general playerbase by groups of command ships in jita all flicking their 'beacon' on and off (Yes, it would happen. Yes, I would bring my 4 command ships to the beacon protest), would:


  • Be of little benefit if the linker is sat on the edge of a pos bubble or station, where he's not in any danger anyway
  • Highlight targets on grid who are linking, allowing gangs to easily see who they should be shooting
  • Devalue the benefit in running a ganglink on your battlecruiser, as now it would be obvious that you are, and make you a bigger target
  • Create additional clutter


Now, the whole reason I'm posting isn't to be negative, but rather because I don't think this is a good idea, so I'll propose an amendment;

Cause ganglinks, when active, to apply a massive penalty to being probed out, allowing them to be very easy to probe out while boosting, even with loads of ECCM fit. Some sort of idea around the probes being able to lock onto the ganglink communications from the ship.

This, I agree with all of the points.

Also lets not forget the part where skirmish gangs get effectively killed off because inties can warp off and on and always tackle the kiting ganglink in any kind of setup while armor/blob brawls just bring a damn damnation and keep its 1m ehp fat ass alive.



Couldn't be more wrong. Links suck, and add little value to gameplay. They should be on grid, or easily killable.

Also, your points about clutter are irrelevant. I don't care about your hi sec mission runner dealing with "clutter". Turn it off on your overview ffs.

My killboard would be retardedly awesome if I had links in every engagement. Yeah, links are that good.
Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#27 - 2014-10-23 18:09:56 UTC
Tchulen wrote:
elitatwo wrote:
Tchulen wrote:
So you want to penalise the use of on-grid boosters? Are you really sure that's a good idea?...


Nah, we were talking about the off-grid ones that you don't get to see or hear about.

My point is, by giving off-grid boosters this warp to beacon you're completely ruining on-grid boosters which is just dumb considering the general consensus seems to favour on-grid boosting over off-grid boosting as how it *should* work. It isn't a solution or even a band-aid. It's screwing the pooch for no good reason.

elitatwo wrote:
There is no stopping you from bringing your links with you to the grid you want to start an engagement but at the moment nobody does it because the pricetag on command ships.

Yes there is and in fact, that was my entire point. By creating a beacon on your command ship (or whatever is boosting your fleet) you're giving all enemies a direct warp in point for your fleet which is just insanely stupid. As for no one uses command ships to on-grid boost in fleets, yes they do. Just because some people don't, even the majority, isn't a good enough reason to screw it up for those that do especially considering that on-grid boosting is, by general consensus, how it *should* be done.

Luckily for those that do use on-grid boosters, this idea will never see the light of day.


This was what I was touching on myself. It's going to make the problem worse, not better. The op and a few of the others ignored this though, convinced that they have a good solution, as opposed to a bad one. And yes, like Tchulen mentions, people do use ongrid boosters in command ships, that's a big part of why doomsdays were changed to target capitals only; so titans couldnt keep dd instakilling ganglinks ongrid.
Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#28 - 2014-10-23 18:13:04 UTC
Phaade wrote:
In addition, the link ship should become suspect. It should also add a 60 second combat timer (can't jump through gates or dock).

You want links for your ships to shoot me, I get to shoot your link ship on gates and stations.


Yes, while we're at it on completely unreasonable and ridiculous demands and expectations, all missions should create beacons in lowsec, so pvpers can warp to them. Mining ship ore bays should be accessible to everyone, so they can be stolen from. Capital ships should be free if you're poor. Major trade hubs should have free teleports to the other trade hubs.

Because that's what you're doing here, Phaade. Spewing completely ridiculous garbage.
Phaade
Know-Nothings
Negative Feedback
#29 - 2014-10-23 18:54:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Phaade
Arronicus wrote:
Phaade wrote:
In addition, the link ship should become suspect. It should also add a 60 second combat timer (can't jump through gates or dock).

You want links for your ships to shoot me, I get to shoot your link ship on gates and stations.


Yes, while we're at it on completely unreasonable and ridiculous demands and expectations, all missions should create beacons in lowsec, so pvpers can warp to them. Mining ship ore bays should be accessible to everyone, so they can be stolen from. Capital ships should be free if you're poor. Major trade hubs should have free teleports to the other trade hubs.

Because that's what you're doing here, Phaade. Spewing completely ridiculous garbage.


Its not ridiculous by any means. Maybe not suspect, certainly an agression timer.

Sorry this puts your station humping link alt at risk. And frankly I dont give a damn about making your level 4 mission grinding easier.

Links should never have been implemented to begin with.

Edit: LMAO at your suggestion that people use links on grid. Thats literally less than 1 in 100.
Estella Osoka
Cranky Bitches Who PMS
#30 - 2014-10-23 19:19:55 UTC
Phaade wrote:
Arronicus wrote:
Phaade wrote:
In addition, the link ship should become suspect. It should also add a 60 second combat timer (can't jump through gates or dock).

You want links for your ships to shoot me, I get to shoot your link ship on gates and stations.


Yes, while we're at it on completely unreasonable and ridiculous demands and expectations, all missions should create beacons in lowsec, so pvpers can warp to them. Mining ship ore bays should be accessible to everyone, so they can be stolen from. Capital ships should be free if you're poor. Major trade hubs should have free teleports to the other trade hubs.

Because that's what you're doing here, Phaade. Spewing completely ridiculous garbage.


Its not ridiculous by any means. Maybe not suspect, certainly an agression timer.

Sorry this puts your station humping link alt at risk. And frankly I dont give a damn about making your level 4 mission grinding easier.

Links should never have been implemented to begin with.

Edit: LMAO at your suggestion that people use links on grid. Thats literally less than 1 in 100.


Aggression timer for using links isn't a bad idea. We're not talking about giving the link alt a suspect/criminal flag. Link ship just can't dock or jump for 1 minute after they turn off the mods.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#31 - 2014-10-23 19:57:05 UTC
It might be time to look at a middle ground solution. Make active links their own type of signature, which gives you a place to start looking for them at the very least. This retains the scanner requirement, alerts others to the presence of links if they do basic scouting, allows you to set traps on the links for those more curious than sensible, etc.

The ability to scan down this sig should be dependent on the type and number of links used, to give boosting orcas with mining boosts only less of a nerf than 6 link command ships/ 5-7 link t3s. Make anything with 8 combat links ( not currently possible IIRC) effectively an anom, and scale down by logarithmic progression (7 combat links = t1 probes, astro 1, 4 au spread for 100%) to actually make it a choice of running all the links, running tank suitable to survive long enough to get help and what links are actually critical for your setup.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#32 - 2014-10-23 20:41:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Lady Rift
How is giving the enemy a beacon to land at whatever range they want on my fleet going to make me use links on grid. If anything this will just make it so that I never run links with fleet and only on gates/stations/POS's. with enough tank to wait out a weapons timer or for my fleet to land depending on number of enemies.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#33 - 2014-10-23 20:45:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
@James Baboli

By the "4 AU spread" you mean a Virtue Pod with Scanning implants and scanning rigs/mids? Because if you don't mean that and every scrub in a Heron with T1 launchers and standard probes can scan down the links, it would be a little bit too easy, don't you think? Virtue pods would then be able to find such a ship with a 16 AU spread. Roll

All in all, I find that scanning is way underrepresented in the entire discussion. It appears to me that scanning for ships is not fashionable anymore and can't be asked of the "modern player" any longer... I know for a matter of fact that Virtue pods in a standard fitted Anathema can scan down link ships -- even those, which are supposed to be "unscannable" -- with relative ease. What you need is practice and some ISK. Is that too much to ask for?

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Alundil
Rolled Out
#34 - 2014-10-23 20:48:41 UTC
Arronicus wrote:
-1, because this does not solve the issue it seeks to. Creating a beacon, ignoring the annoyances that would cause, and the way it would be used to harass the general playerbase by groups of command ships in jita all flicking their 'beacon' on and off (Yes, it would happen. Yes, I would bring my 4 command ships to the beacon protest), would:


  • Be of little benefit if the linker is sat on the edge of a pos bubble or station, where he's not in any danger anyway
  • Highlight targets on grid who are linking, allowing gangs to easily see who they should be shooting
  • Devalue the benefit in running a ganglink on your battlecruiser, as now it would be obvious that you are, and make you a bigger target
  • Create additional clutter


Now, the whole reason I'm posting isn't to be negative, but rather because I don't think this is a good idea, so I'll propose an amendment;

Cause ganglinks, when active, to apply a massive penalty to being probed out, allowing them to be very easy to probe out while boosting, even with loads of ECCM fit. Some sort of idea around the probes being able to lock onto the ganglink communications from the ship.

I suggested something along these very lines a while back.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4717103#post4717103

I'm right behind you
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings
#35 - 2014-10-23 21:02:55 UTC
Ncc 1709 wrote:
-1
this would force boosters off grid simply because their fleet wont want a beacon that gives their position away


Or you could always, you know, not turn on your links until you're ready to fight.

Of course, this is ultimately a band-aid on a tumor. You don't bandage tumors.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#36 - 2014-10-23 21:10:02 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
@James Baboli

By the "4 AU spread" you mean a Virtue Pod with Scanning implants and scanning rigs/mids? Because if you don't mean that and every scrub in a Heron with T1 launchers and standard probes can scan down the links, it would be a little bit too easy, don't you think? Virtue pods would then be able to find such a ship with a 16 AU spread. Roll

All in all, I find that scanning is way underrepresented in the entire discussion. It appears to me that scanning for ships is not fashionable anymore and can't be asked of the "modern player" any longer... I know for a matter of fact that Virtue pods in a standard fitted Anathema can scan down link ships -- even those, which are supposed to be "unscannable" -- with relative ease. What you need is practice and some ISK. Is that too much to ask for?


7 links on one ship is an extreme option, and should have an extreme counterpoint. It is more than almost any t3 can run without serious bling, and I know of 2 command ships that can do it without going heavily into the faction co-procs and genolution sets. This is why I said it gets logarithmically harder to probe down ships based on the signature alone as they fit fewer links. This means 2 link, on-grid boosters are likely easier to find because someone has their MWD on if you have combat probes, and 6 link perfect command ships sat in safes or hugging POS/stations become easy to find even with minimal skills and investment. It brings risk/reward into the decision to light up links at some level.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#37 - 2014-10-23 22:54:45 UTC
what also could be a good temp solution until they can make on grid boosting possible is make it easier for probers to find people running links

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#38 - 2014-10-23 23:04:44 UTC
Ellendras Silver wrote:
what also could be a good temp solution until they can make on grid boosting possible is make it easier for probers to find people running links

See above. There are several variations on this, with most seeming to run it as something like making them a signature.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
#39 - 2014-10-24 13:33:59 UTC
Milton Middleson wrote:
Ncc 1709 wrote:
-1
this would force boosters off grid simply because their fleet wont want a beacon that gives their position away


Or you could always, you know, not turn on your links until you're ready to fight.

Of course, this is ultimately a band-aid on a tumor. You don't bandage tumors.

This issue with only turning on your links when you're ready to fight is it still gives the enemy a warp in point to your fleet. So, they don't need to probe you down in the middle of the fight, just get an interceptor to burn away from your fleet, warp to it then warp to the beacon that your link ship is giving out.

Turning your links on only when you want them wouldn't help the situation at all, I'm afraid.

How about, considering what everyone seems to want is for links to only work on-grid, we all petition CCP to make them only work on-grid rather than try to find ways to try to force people to only use them on grid which inevitably screw other things in the game up? Just a thought.
Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#40 - 2014-10-24 17:08:13 UTC
Alundil wrote:
Arronicus wrote:
-1, because this does not solve the issue it seeks to. Creating a beacon, ignoring the annoyances that would cause, and the way it would be used to harass the general playerbase by groups of command ships in jita all flicking their 'beacon' on and off (Yes, it would happen. Yes, I would bring my 4 command ships to the beacon protest), would:


  • Be of little benefit if the linker is sat on the edge of a pos bubble or station, where he's not in any danger anyway
  • Highlight targets on grid who are linking, allowing gangs to easily see who they should be shooting
  • Devalue the benefit in running a ganglink on your battlecruiser, as now it would be obvious that you are, and make you a bigger target
  • Create additional clutter


Now, the whole reason I'm posting isn't to be negative, but rather because I don't think this is a good idea, so I'll propose an amendment;

Cause ganglinks, when active, to apply a massive penalty to being probed out, allowing them to be very easy to probe out while boosting, even with loads of ECCM fit. Some sort of idea around the probes being able to lock onto the ganglink communications from the ship.

I suggested something along these very lines a while back.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4717103#post4717103


Tried to like/post, was locked, ah well.
Previous page123Next page