These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Off Grid Boosting - NO MORE - CCP, one more look
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rakaar
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1 - 2014-12-01 19:05:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Rakaar
CCP, please take away off-grid boosting.

not to beat a dead horse but.....

I have been guilty of off-grid boosting for myself and corp. for years in TAMA.

With the current changes to eve, and the current CCP uprising of amazing changes.

Arrow a solo or small gang should not need off-grid booster to be competitive
Arrow on-grid boosting is fine and will support new game play, if the only means of boosts
Arrow a new wave or solo pvp will emerge if off-grid links are taken away
Arrow in general it is neither honorable or healthy for the game to have off-grid boosts

CCP, you have been taking some great steps to make eve better as of late, please consider this issue again.
Quesa
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#2 - 2014-12-01 19:07:47 UTC
No, absolutely not. There is an entirely unique meta that has developed for the probing out and destroying of links.
Wolf Incaelum
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3 - 2014-12-01 19:12:39 UTC
Quesa wrote:
No, absolutely not. There is an entirely unique meta that has developed for the probing out and destroying of links.


It's easy to avoid being probed. Set up a network of dead space safe spots and constantly warp between them.

ANARCHYFOREVAAARRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#4 - 2014-12-01 19:15:47 UTC
Rakaar wrote:

not to beat a dead horse but.....


*thump!*

And lol ,honour, hahaha.

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#5 - 2014-12-01 19:31:35 UTC
Quesa wrote:
No, absolutely not. There is an entirely unique meta that has developed for the probing out and destroying of links.


That's sort of a bad rationale for keeping a mechanic. There was a unique meta for capitals before phoebe, but many are glad that's out the window along with the mechanics that allowed it.

Especially with all the new players around. Everyone's happy to assure them they can be competitive against veterans in frigates or assault frigates inside a few months, but this is patently false due to off grid links, and exacerbated by the excessively kitey meta.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#6 - 2014-12-01 19:42:55 UTC
Wolf Incaelum wrote:
Quesa wrote:
No, absolutely not. There is an entirely unique meta that has developed for the probing out and destroying of links.


It's easy to avoid being probed. Set up a network of dead space safe spots and constantly warp between them.



the fact you cant use links when in warp means that the prober is doing its job of shutting down your links
Agondray
Avenger Mercenaries
VOID Intergalactic Forces
#7 - 2014-12-01 19:45:23 UTC
Incursion runners would have to lose links or every incursion group becomes vg groups, only way I can see a commandship tanking a HQ is expensive modules and a perma ab then Sit there and wait to broadcast when attacked. It will only effect a couple thousand people in all groups

"Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith
Iain Cariaba
#8 - 2014-12-01 19:46:04 UTC
CCP devs have repeatedly stated they want to remove off grid boosting, but that the process to do so is difficult because of how it ties into other things in the code.

Quit whining about it already.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#9 - 2014-12-01 19:48:30 UTC
Quesa wrote:
No, absolutely not. There is an entirely unique meta that has developed for the probing out and destroying of links.


There used to be a unique meta about destroying full fleet with a single doomsday. New meta developing from mechanic does not mean the mechanic is good.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#10 - 2014-12-01 19:51:39 UTC
Agondray wrote:
Incursion runners would have to lose links or every incursion group becomes vg groups, only way I can see a commandship tanking a HQ is expensive modules and a perma ab then Sit there and wait to broadcast when attacked. It will only effect a couple thousand people in all groups


Same perma AB and anchor pattern as logi but with more tank to compensate the larger base sig size. Oh noes, HQ sites might take a bit more time and lower our ISK/hours under whatever it is at now because it's been too long since I ran HQ.
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#11 - 2014-12-01 20:04:52 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Agondray wrote:
Incursion runners would have to lose links or every incursion group becomes vg groups, only way I can see a commandship tanking a HQ is expensive modules and a perma ab then Sit there and wait to broadcast when attacked. It will only effect a couple thousand people in all groups


Same perma AB and anchor pattern as logi but with more tank to compensate the larger base sig size. Oh noes, HQ sites might take a bit more time and lower our ISK/hours under whatever it is at now because it's been too long since I ran HQ.



boosting is a boring mechanic. that command ship would basically be only boosting in site so that it cant be afk in case it needs reps but its not going to do anything else. Or the better groups will just roll with it and make sure the booster is always targeted and watch listed and it will just be the fc's alt that he doesn't have to pay attention to.
Bullet Therapist
FT Cold Corporation
#12 - 2014-12-01 20:26:38 UTC
Wolf Incaelum wrote:
Quesa wrote:
No, absolutely not. There is an entirely unique meta that has developed for the probing out and destroying of links.


It's easy to avoid being probed. Set up a network of dead space safe spots and constantly warp between them.


I don't think you've used links before.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#13 - 2014-12-01 20:54:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
How does completely killing this kind of solo PVP, where the OGB gives your ship at least a tiny edge over the blob, cause "a new wave or[sic!] solo pvp [to] emerge if off-grid links are taken away"?

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.
Bullet Therapist
FT Cold Corporation
#14 - 2014-12-01 20:56:20 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
CCP devs have repeatedly stated they want to remove off grid boosting, but that the process to do so is difficult because of how it ties into other things in the code.

Quit whining about it already.


When did they say that? I know that they wanted to, and did, remove pos boosting, and said that they'd look into it further if they needed to.

The only thing that I'd really say about links is that t3 links require a highly specialized and expensive platform to be able to probe down. You basically need to have max skills and implants, or close enough to it if they're properly trained. Moreover t3 boosters can still fit a covops cloak and be nullified, though at the expense of a link. This goes back to one of a hundred things that are wrong with t3 cruisers.

All said, a LOT of people don't know how to fit a booster, and you can generally kill them with two players, one scanner and one combat toon if you know what you're doing.

Command ships stuck in deadspace or outside of a pos are sitting ducks and in the case of them orbiting a pos you only need a cloaky alt to provide a warpin, after which you merely alpha them before they can get back into the shield.

We know that links are powerful, but they come at the cost of specialization, and not without a good deal of risk. There are issues with t3 links, like everything else on the t3 line.
Cynric Cobon-Han
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2014-12-01 21:09:49 UTC
If booster must be on-grid then give command ships insane tanks and reduced dps capabilities. The opposition can then waste ammo bringing it down or concentrate on a boosted fleet. In 1v1 PvP the ship would grind the opposition to dust, assuming its DPS can break the opponent's tank. After all, it sounds more like a fleet support ship than an all-out combat ship.
Odithia
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#16 - 2014-12-01 21:21:30 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
How does completely killing this kind of solo PVP, where the OGB gives your ship at least a tiny edge over the blob, cause "a new wave or[sic!] solo pvp [to] emerge if off-grid links are taken away"?

Between Pirate ships, Pirate implants and faction/deadspace modules, there have never been that many tools for man versus newbieblob eliteness.
Only you stand more chance of losing your shiny stuff that way.
Bullet Therapist
FT Cold Corporation
#17 - 2014-12-01 21:26:56 UTC
Odithia wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
How does completely killing this kind of solo PVP, where the OGB gives your ship at least a tiny edge over the blob, cause "a new wave or[sic!] solo pvp [to] emerge if off-grid links are taken away"?

Between Pirate ships, Pirate implants and faction/deadspace modules, there have never been that many tools for man versus newbieblob eliteness.
Only you stand more chance of losing your shiny stuff that way.



Yep. You use booster toons, you're going to lose boost ships eventually. It's not without risk, and nothing should be. Look at hurley and his 150b driveby pwnmobile. 464 dudes were on that killmail and about 20% of them only had to wait a week after starting playing to get their 'this is eve' moment.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#18 - 2014-12-01 21:32:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Odithia wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
How does completely killing this kind of solo PVP, where the OGB gives your ship at least a tiny edge over the blob, cause "a new wave or[sic!] solo pvp [to] emerge if off-grid links are taken away"?

Between Pirate ships, Pirate implants and faction/deadspace modules, there have never been that many tools for man versus newbieblob eliteness.
Only you stand more chance of losing your shiny stuff that way.

Oh, OffGB can make a huge difference. Just look what predator 666 is able to do with his OffGB, against massive odds. And this is what people like the OP want to take away from the game. You cannot achieve that with OnGB under any circumstances.

Who does not like OffGB should stop demanding their removal and instead start training for a perfect prober and save some ISK or LP for a Virtue set and probe them down during a fleet fight and remove them with a dedicated squad. However, that requires effort and is not easy. Roll

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.
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#19 - 2014-12-01 21:46:07 UTC
C'mon guys, if you don't have an OGB toon, a market toon, a scanning toon, a forum toon, a PvP toon, a mission toon...... then what are you doing playing Eve? sheesh.... Roll

On a serious note, I have made use of off-grid boosting and I have fought people using it and I have also flown in many an incursion fleet with full boosters. Now, with that out of the way, I think that boosting definitely needs to be reworked. I don't know how, I don't have that much experience with the in-depth mechanics of boosting to make informed suggestions for changes but I do agree that there is definitely room for improvement.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#20 - 2014-12-01 22:25:54 UTC
Fairly simple change I would like to see to nerf it hard is that active links increase your signature radius, so you can't just AFK them

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
123Next pageLast page