EVE General Discussion

sib you scary.

boosters get headshotted but considering the scale of the benefit to fleet, it is more than fair if they are at risk.

I engage in both off grid afk boosting in highsec, and tanky damnation on grid boosting elsewhere. bc RP i suppose

Even a weapons timer would help a lot in lowsec. It is pathetic to see so many T3s hugging stations and gates. Where is the risk when they can just jump or dock?

Re:Zappity and Des, maybe relevant, but a lot can change in a person's opinion in a year.







Goon of my heart.

If we can agree that the nerf would stop with the timer and potentially kill-mails and sensor strength rebalancing (though the latter would only need a very small adjustment, since scanning is much stronger now), then we should just go through with it and put the matter to rest. IF. Keyword "if."

Then the smaller parties in uneven battles will be disproportionately worse-off than they are today. Talking about small-to-medium gang warfare here, and not "solo" stuff.

The use of boosters is a constant right now. It's the status quo.

If boosting is brought on grid, then what's going to happen is that the larger force in a fight will always have the advantage, because they'll be able to kill the booster easily.

Let's say there's a fleet of 25 players, and a fleet of 50 players. Furthermore, let's arbitrarily say that a booster increases fleet efficiency by 50%, and that the threshold for destroying a booster without any recourse (that is to say, it gets popped instantly no matter the fit and/or amount of logistics present) is 50 players.

Here are some scenarios for off-grid boosting:

25 vs 25 = 25*1.5 vs 25*1.5 (boosters off-grid and intact unless parties show initiative off the field of battle)
50 vs 50 = 50*1.5 vs 50*1.5 (boosters off-grid and intact unless parties show initiative off the field of battle)
25 vs 50 = 25*1.5 vs 50*1.5 (boosters off-grid and intact unless parties show initiative off the field of battle)

The balance of power remains the same regardless of fleet size.

Now for on-grid boosting:

25 vs 25 = 25*1.5 vs 25*1.5 (neither fleet can destroy each other's boosters better than the other can)
50 vs 50 = 50*1.0 vs 50*1.0 (both fleets destroy each other's boosters with equal efficiency)
25 vs 50 != 25*1.0 vs 50*1.5 (the first fleet's booster is destroyed, and therefore the balance of power is destroyed)

The larger party now has the advantage as long as it exceeds the threshold level for outgoing damage.

Hopefully the numbers get my point across.

NP. This has been my argument throughout the years for why boosting absolutely can't be brought on-grid. It should either remain off-grid, or be removed entirely. Making it grid-only will create a massive power imbalance that will only serve to encourage people to only field forces in excess of the threshold required for instantly "de-boosting" enemy fleets. This will wreck smaller-scale pvp.

That's funny. Because, when we can be bothered to, SMERG does it every time we try.

CCP is always right and their goals and direction are not to be questioned.

I don't even remember what thread that was.

In any case, there are several issues with removing OGB. As mentioned before, it leads to a situation where larger fleets become even more powerful against smaller fleets, both because it will be easier for larger fleets to remove boosters from the grid, and because larger fleets will usually come from groups that can bring more boosting ships. There are problems associated with the concept itself, such as the fact that fleets don't always necessarily stay together in the same grid, and the fact that grids sometimes break in unexpected ways.

Let's say interceptors go chasing after a target. When they get there, they won't have boosts. They can't, the boosting ship just isn't fast enough to keep up. You're basically saying that interceptors have to gimp their effectiveness in order receive boosts... to improve their effectiveness.