These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Can't believe Off Grid Boosting is still around. Srsly?

First post
Author
Scipio Artelius
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2015-03-08 22:59:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Budda Kuha wrote:
What about the players who don't run links? Many of them will be hesitant to engage at all since they will always be afraid that the incursus in that plex might be able to tank their gang due to that legion floating in space somewhere but not showing up on these embarrassing km's. Why do you even need links anyway? I fight 1vsmany most of the time and i have a lot of fun doing it. There are other ways than bluntly boosting your stats. kiting for instance. Don't you realize that this whole ogb thing is a huge turn off for casuals, newer players or generally anybody who doesn't want to run a second account? Shouldn't success in pvp be determined by tactical means and by what you actually throw in the ring (aka risking it)rather than by a boosting t3 or command ship which doesn't interact during the fight whatsoever? You sound freasonable so i'm really hoping that you understand that it's not about not having a link alt, I could easily afford one tbh but that wouldn't change the fact that for reasons stated above ogb's are a terrible mechanic.

If they don't run links, that's their choice. If they are hesitant because of that, then they will find some other excuse to be hesitant in the absence of links. Risk aversion is not determined by the presence of links in the game, it's an individual thing that exists outside the game mechanics.

Why do I need links? I don't particularly. It's a game mechanic that is available, so I choose to use it. There is nothing wrong in doing so and it's nothing about boosting my stats. I don't give two hoots about stats, just having good fights. In relation to this particular issue, links allow me to engage a much wider group of targets, both having and bringing good fights as a result. So in my personal experience, they aren't a negative in that respect.

In relation to casuals. Quite frankily, if they are going to whinge because they are a casual, then that is just another excuse used. "I'm just casual. It's not fair" is a pretty weak argument and if someone doesn't want to run a second account, then links are no different to someone else choosing to run a second account for logistics, or as to multibox DPS. 2 v 1 in those cases is no different, but complaining about not wanting to do something is the typical request for CCP to step in and help because they can't accept that it is their own self imposed limitation.

Success in pvp is never a concrete thing (with or without links) and no, why should tactical means be the only thing that affect outcome? Operational and Strategic decisions are equally important.

But overall I don't disagree with the argument about OGB. It could be removed from the game and the only affect would be to make the landscape of pvp a little less interesting (more uniform and less varied in that respect).

The only lament I would have from that is the time and effort that has gone into training a character to use the mechanics to their best advantage. It's not a trivial commitment. Those who make that choice gain benefit out of that choice, but if you look at the skillset of that character I linked, she is pretty much links focused at the moment and has been constantly trained since she was started two and a half years ago. Links characters are not an instant win button. But I'd move on and find some other use for her it if happens.
RZ Tivianne
HELLSINKER
#42 - 2015-03-08 23:04:02 UTC
If you had bothered to do any real research on the subject you would know that the reason off-grid boosters are still a thing is because the math needed to make on-grid boosting will not be necessary until Brain in a Box is done, which still has the ETA of ~soon~. For more information, just search brain in a box on the devblogs and you'll see plenty of info, ditto with the forums, and that will explain the technical side and why it's important/necessary to the change.
Scipio Artelius
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#43 - 2015-03-08 23:07:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
RZ Tivianne wrote:
If you had bothered to do any real research on the subject you would know that the reason off-grid boosters are still a thing is because the math needed to make on-grid boosting will not be necessary until Brain in a Box is done, which still has the ETA of ~soon~. For more information, just search brain in a box on the devblogs and you'll see plenty of info, ditto with the forums, and that will explain the technical side and why it's important/necessary to the change.

In the absence of brain-in-a-box, I guess it would always be possible to remove links from the game temporarily.

I don't see that happening, but temporary solutions should be possible until the preferred approach is available. Passive boosts from leadsrhip skills would still exist, but it should be possible to temporarily remove the effect of links modules.
Budda Kuha
Buster Blade
#44 - 2015-03-08 23:15:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Budda Kuha
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Budda Kuha wrote:
What about the players who don't run links? Many of them will be hesitant to engage at all since they will always be afraid that the incursus in that plex might be able to tank their gang due to that legion floating in space somewhere but not showing up on these embarrassing km's. Why do you even need links anyway? I fight 1vsmany most of the time and i have a lot of fun doing it. There are other ways than bluntly boosting your stats. kiting for instance. Don't you realize that this whole ogb thing is a huge turn off for casuals, newer players or generally anybody who doesn't want to run a second account? Shouldn't success in pvp be determined by tactical means and by what you actually throw in the ring (aka risking it)rather than by a boosting t3 or command ship which doesn't interact during the fight whatsoever? You sound freasonable so i'm really hoping that you understand that it's not about not having a link alt, I could easily afford one tbh but that wouldn't change the fact that for reasons stated above ogb's are a terrible mechanic.

If they don't run links, that's their choice. If they are hesitant because of that, then they will find some other excuse to be hesitant in the absence of links. Risk aversion is not determined by the presence of links in the game, it's an individual thing that exists outside the game mechanics.

Why do I need links? I don't particularly. It's a game mechanic that is available, so I choose to use it. There is nothing wrong in doing so and it's nothing about boosting my stats. I don't give two hoots about stats, just having good fights. In relation to this particular issue, links allow me to engage a much wider group of targets, both having and bringing good fights as a result. So in my personal experience, they aren't a negative in that respect.

In relation to casuals. Quite frankily, if they are going to whinge because they are a casual, then that is just another excuse used. "I'm just casual. It's not fair" is a pretty weak argument and if someone doesn't want to run a second account, then links are no different to someone else choosing to run a second account for logistics, or as to multibox DPS. 2 v 1 in those cases is no different, but complaining about not wanting to do something is the typical request for CCP to step in and help because they can't accept that it is their own self imposed limitation.

Success in pvp is never a concrete thing (with or without links) and no, why should tactical means be the only thing that affect outcome? Operational and Strategic decisions are equally important.

But overall I don't disagree with the argument about OGB. It could be removed from the game and the only affect would be to make the landscape of pvp a little less interesting (more uniform and less varied in that respect).

The only lament I would have from that is the time and effort that has gone into training a character to use the mechanics to their best advantage. It's not a trivial commitment. Those who make that choice gain benefit out of that choice, but if you look at the skillset of that character I linked, she is pretty much links focused at the moment and has been constantly trained since she was started two and a half years ago. Links characters are not an instant win button.


To sum things up: You think that time and money invested in a game should factor into pvp even more than it's already the case. In contrast to that I and many of the opponents of ogb believe that tactical means aka actual skill should be more decisive and that in terms of accessability this would lead to a healthier game in general.

In that regard we have essentially different notions of what kind of a game eve should be. Your statement that removing ogb would lead to a more uniform landscape is imo just plain wrong though. Leveling the field creates competition which puts incentive on creative tactical solutions. Thus New Eden would most certainly become a more interesting place in terms of pvp.
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2015-03-08 23:21:20 UTC
Off Grid Boosting exists for one big reason:
On Grid Boosting is NOT viable. Not unless you are in Carriers or Titans. Or a Slep roam. Beyond that booting ships are survivable for any length of time at all. It's a broken mechanic with broken ships and modules that hamper their use in small fleets, and in large ones make Off Grid, or using Cap's that aren't as easy to just blow off the grid.


CCP did make changes so there's no more of the unscanable Booster ships, and kicked them out of the POS's (except for Rorq/Orca, they can still boost in a POS till they get their rebalance).. Which was a good change imho. They are now able to be killed, you just need to get them, or keep forcing them to warp, either way removes the boosts.

Now for me, I think Off Grid boosting should remain, but with one change. I'd like difference bonuses for off grid vs on grid. Say a 50% Bonus for being On Grid (Or a 50% Reduction for being off grid)..
Also, I'd like an end to those Command Processors. Having them take up your mids kills shield booster ships. It makes no sense that you can fit near a full rack of links on a Damnation, AND Tank, but try that on a Vulture you get just the links and nada else. Just make it so you can fit as many as there are slots on Command Ships, and adjust their fitting stats to even it out. T3's.. hell just make it 1link + link for each level of that Subsystems skill. There's your 6 high slots. Do the same for Carriers and Titans. Leave BC's alone as 1 link only..


Now as for the comment about can't warp/jump/etc.. Well Boosting should give an aggression timer.. so no gates/docking while links are on+1min. While in warp, links go off anyway, so as long as you keep scanning em down, they aren't boosting anything, or are tackled. It takes about as much SP to make a scanning toon that can scan down that booster in seconds, as it does to have the perfect booster.. so I don't see the issue myself.. sooner or later you'll catch em, or they won't notice the probes, and you'll have your kill. In the mean time constant warping will keep them from boosting.

Another idea, increase the cycle time of links, but make them take a massive amount of cap at the beginning.. it would average out to the same now, but if you keep activating them as you warp away, land, etc, then you'll be cap dry in short order and unable to warp, or unable to boost. Or blowing though a lot of charges, which again, finite amount, can't keep it up forever..
Scipio Artelius
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2015-03-08 23:34:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Budda Kuha wrote:
To sum things up: You think that time and money invested in a game should factor into pvp even more than it's already the case. In contrast to that I and many of the opponents of ogb believe that tactical means aka actual skill should be more decisive and that in terms of accessability this would lead to a healthier game in general.

No, I think that is a misinterpretation of what I intended. Probably my bad writing more than anything.

No pvp in this game is based purely on the skill of individual pilots.

The choice of ship and fit, the focus of skillpoints (those small percentages can make a difference at times), the location of the engagement and how the ships are arranged on grid (a kiting ship warping into a FW Plex with a brawling ship inside is likely to be at a disadvantage initially irrespective of on-grid skill, but skill to pull range before being tackled helps), implants, drug boosters, resists, etc. - are all variables that mean no engagement comes down purely to skill.

But in some respects many of those things are also skill based, but at a different level of decision making. Tactical decisions on grid have a huge effect on the outcome of a fight, but they aren't the only ones and no fight is straight up skill based.

Quote:
In that regard we have essentially different notions of what kind of a game eve should be. Your statement that removing ogb would lead to a more uniform landscape is imo just plain wrong though.

There is a lot of variety in choice we make for pvp. Removing any of them makes the game more uniform. Levelling the field would also involve removing drugs, implants, different fleet setups, etc. There is no practical way to level the field. That's what makes pvp so much of a challenge. Overcoming and/or making best use of the odds is why pvp is so much fun, at least in my view.

Quote:
Leveling the field creates competition which puts incentive on creative tactical solutions. Thus New Eden would most certainly become a more interesting place in terms of pvp.

This I'll agree we differ. Levelling the field in my view creates less interest.

The most level a field could be would be equal skillpoints, same ships, same fits and same choices in every other aspect. That would become very boring quickly in my opinion.
Serene Repose
#47 - 2015-03-08 23:49:44 UTC
People who do it, ridicule. Rational people go, huh? You get an extra row of pawns? To the response, "Crybaby!"

We must accommodate the idiocracy.

Asura Vajrarupa
Doomheim
#48 - 2015-03-09 00:02:34 UTC
It's a terrible mechanic but produces hilarious killmails and salty tears when you catch an ogb and kill it.

Ignorance is the cause of suffering.

Budda Kuha
Buster Blade
#49 - 2015-03-09 00:08:31 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
No, I think that is a misinterpretation of what I intended. Probably my bad writing more than anything.

No pvp in this game is based purely on the skill of individual pilots.

The choice of ship and fit, the focus of skillpoints (those small percentages can make a difference at times), the location of the engagement and how the ships are arranged on grid (a kiting ship warping into a FW Plex with a brawling ship inside is likely to be at a disadvantage initially irrespective of on-grid skill, but skill to pull range before being tackled helps), implants, drug boosters, resists, etc. - are all variables that mean no engagement comes down purely to skill.

But in some respects many of those things are also skill based, but at a different level of decision making. Tactical decisions on grid have a huge effect on the outcome of a fight, but they aren't the only ones and no fight is straight up skill based.


Agreed, but the point was that you want static factors like sp or a booster alt to have a bigger impact wheras I and others would prefer spontanious tactical decisions to be more decisive. The strategic aspect of eve has a huge impact as it is -that's just fine and nobody wants to turn eve pvp into a game of chess I believe. The problem with boosts is that they provide a massive advantage which especially in solo pvp can't be countered and which involves no risk or interaction even. I'm sure you understand how that makes ogb's unique compared to any other static factor or strategic decision. Removing links would leave more room for dynamic factors like smart manual piloting and deception and I just think that would make a better game as I'm sure you'll understand. But tbh as i said i don't really wanted to discuss why ogb is a bad mechanic. That has basically been settled
Carrie-Anne Moss
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#50 - 2015-03-09 00:39:32 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Carrie-Anne Moss wrote:
Ummm dont you think 10-30 ships SHOULD DIE IN SECONDS to 900 ships?? Lol

The fact that 10-30 can last more than seconds against such odds is proof it is unlabanced.

Haha, no.

Look at how many small gangs come to catch for good fights and end up against larger Brave fleets, or third-partying into fights you guys are having already.

Piloting skill means a lot more than links in those situations. Go and watch a couple of the Chessur videos on YouTube for good examples of that exact situation.

We used to do the same in Barlequet before you took sov. 200 in system and we would snipe with kiting rails fits and everyone had a great time (without links too).


Chessur is leet, yet flies billion isk ships with drugs and OFFGRID BOOSTERS lol thats the whole point dude. Wtf?
Sean Parisi
Blackrise Vanguard
United Caldari Space Command.
#51 - 2015-03-09 00:49:13 UTC
Just my personal opinion as a Semi-Link whore.

-> Drastically lower boosts for Offgrid boosts. IE: Instead of a 30% bonus, change it to about 5%.
-> 30% bonus for On grid Boosting
-> Add more boosting ships for each ship size. Battleship, Destroyer, Frigate, Cruiser (Not T3's)
-> Nerf fitting requirement on links to increase combat viability of on grid ships.

What does this mean? Offgrid boosting is still capable - providing a small advantage, but not an exponential one. Encourage people to bring their links on field while being useful. Make links more accessible as well.
Hal Morsh
Doomheim
#52 - 2015-03-09 01:03:28 UTC
I hate off grid boosts. Thing is there is a way to defeat them if you have a group who can follow well with a half intelligent FC.

I was in this group who got wardeced. Thing here is they didn't often leave system because thye flew about in boosted garmurs. You get caught off a station or gate and you weren't escaping. Even with low DPS from them you'd still be permastuck.

What we did is we had someone occupy the garmurs, got someone to scan the links and pilot in front of it, when we jumped some destroyers in system and ganked it. They decided to tell us it was "backup links" we killed but the garmurs were reported to slow down.


It wasn't long before they got replacement links onfield even though we podded their links. The war ended shortly after, but as an example. Occupy the link receiver then start scanning. Till CCP fixes it.

Oh, I perfectly understand, Hal Morsh — a mission like this requires courage, skill, and heroism… qualities you are clearly lacking. Have you forgotten you're one of the bloody immortals!?

Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
#53 - 2015-03-09 01:20:35 UTC
I think they should get rid of boosts entirely. No off grid, no on grid, no fleet bonus. Turn the command ships into something else. Refund SP for fleet command skills and allow anyone to form a fleet of any size.
Scipio Artelius
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2015-03-09 01:31:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Budda Kuha wrote:
Agreed, but the point was that you want static factors like sp or a booster alt to have a bigger impact wheras I and others would prefer spontanious tactical decisions to be more decisive.

No, that's not what I want at all.

I became involved in what has been a reasonable discussion up to now because a view was put that links only make people risk averse and pvp slow and static. I offered a counter-view to that based on my experience.

But presuming to know what I want when I've never said that at all just risks this devolving into personal assumptions and attacks, which leads to pointless discussion.

So I'll bow out, because that's not productive. But what you claim about me is not true.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#55 - 2015-03-09 03:08:50 UTC
Lictas Alice wrote:
I know , i kinda hinted at that a few posts earlier. If they can't implement on grid links , i am pretty sure theres other things they could do. Links on kilmails would be great , all those 'solo' pilots that need links to win would be exposed and probbably stop using them

Again this wouldn't have any affect on their use in highsec.

When you need links in highsec it's usually because you intend to engage a numerically superior but otherwise inferior opponent and that extra advantage. The numbers of people involved in your kills is irrelevant and losing the element of surprise after their first use is much the same as it is with neutral logistics except with links they are never actually vulnerable.

The logical solution is to give neutral characters that are providing fleet bonuses to characters who are suspect flagged, involved in limited engagements, or are engaging war targets suspect flags.

It sounds like a great idea right? I guarantee it wouldn't work out how people want it to, much like suspect flagging of neutral logistics had a number of funny side effects that routinely screw over the uninformed.
Scipio Artelius
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#56 - 2015-03-09 03:10:05 UTC
Carrie-Anne Moss wrote:
Chessur is leet, yet flies billion isk ships with drugs and OFFGRID BOOSTERS lol thats the whole point dude. Wtf?

Haha, yeah. Not always with OGB.
Boozbaz
Brutor Clan
#57 - 2015-03-09 03:23:54 UTC
Kry Meariver wrote:
Off grid boosting needs to die. If a boosting ship is not on grid with a boosted ship, there should be no bonus. My guess is it is difficult to code the change.


I'm thinking the same thing.
Fade Azura
Weaponized Autists Cartel
#58 - 2015-03-09 06:38:13 UTC
Off grid boosting has already been dealt with .... the nerf to unprobeable t3's and command ships unable to give links within a POS.

everything anyone can do with links can be countered

if they make a hard to probe down t3 it can still be probed down and killed
if they are boosting next to a station or a pos shields .. some tornado's warping in can alpha shot it or force it off

and last but not least you can always bring the same links and use same tactics as they are if you cant do either of the above

if you are unable or unwilling to take the above steps to match your enemy .. then honestly your not on the same level and don't deserve to win that fight.

but anyways this has been discussed to death many times and nothing is going to change anytime soon so stop complaining and go blow some stuff up ... its a lot more constructive then whining on the forums about things that are easily countered or matched.
Amyclas Amatin
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2015-03-09 07:27:51 UTC
Budda Kuha wrote:
I recently bought this toon and returned to EVE after a break due to rl obligations and I was shocked to see that ogb was not only still around but that it has spread like a desease and infested most of lowsec and nullsec even. Before anyone calls me a whiner let me say this: I have much love for EVE as a game and even though i don't have much time to play it I will probably keep my accounts subbed until tranquility shuts down.I'm not a "pro" and I don't care for kb stats but i do care for good fights which way too often simply get ruined by off grid boosted undercover super ships! Wasn't this supposed to be dealt with a long time ago!? Why do you even bother balancing hulls if you're allowing a condor being turned into a garmur from off grid without any notable risk?!


The arguments for getting rid of this terrible mechanic are well known so I won't enumerate them again but seriously: CCP, get your stuff together! You guys know what a turn off ogb is for half of the pvp community, you know how it caters to a dumped down, tedious, slow and risk-averse playsyle that is literally poison to pvp as a whole! If the dogma rewrite still takes time give us something in the meantime! This bullshit mechanic has been around for way too long and not everybody is enough of an eve fanboy to endure your disregard in that respect.CCP, do something!


I too am beside myself with outrage and disbelief over a broken game mechanic. As a customer I feel entitled to demand change.

But deep down inside, I know I deserve everything that CCP does. CCP giveth and CCP taketh away.

For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/

Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"

Demerius Xenocratus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#60 - 2015-03-09 08:10:12 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Alice Saki wrote:
Small Gang NEED Offgb to be effective against larger Targets.


No, you mean kiters need off grid boosts to be effective.

As to the OP, off grid boosting should be eliminated. For almost everything else that can contribute a measurable mechanical benefit to a fight, said asset must be on grid to do so. You cannot off grid logi, you cannot off grid ewar, and you cannot off grid tackle.

You should not be able to off grid boost. Period.

That said, CCP has stated several times that it not unwillingness to do so which holds them back, it is inability to do so. Meaning that they can't actually figure out how to implement it without causing excessive server load.


I'm speechless.