Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Heres my suggestion for fixing links and making command ships interesting to flying.

Links should be an active targeted effect. (Like EWAR)

No decision = No fun
(Copied from a post in the thread)

Bring links on-grid does not go far enough, as the autonomous benefit they provide is to a fleet is broken.

...Imagine if a logistics pilot could just turn on repairs and it would hit everyone in system at the same time, this describes the state of links. Even if you limited them to effecting ships on grid it still sounds broken, doesn't it?

Fleets of a reasonable size are basically forced to bring links or put themselves at a significant disadvantage to their tanks, speed, and EWAR.


It is not: “Lets bring some damp ships, because opposition rely on their range.”

It is: "Bring links for the fight, or keep your fleet docked.

The crux of the problem is two fold:

1. No other ship class comes close to providing the same force multiplying effect to a fleet
2. The bonus you give requires no interaction, forethought or decisions

The below I have given an expert guide on flying a links ship:

Are you in warp? ---Yes
I
No
I
----- > Turn on links

CCP should encourage the active piloting and managing of ships, especial if provides a force multiplying effect.

A Solution

1. Nerf Passive Bonuses - The passive links that a character gives to a fleet should be nerfed (halved?) and the leadership skills buffed by the command ship passive(should require no module). So the fleet gets a passive 15% bonus to tank or speed just for being in fleet with the command ship.


2. Targeted Buffs - If the command ship is on field, they can lock and activate modules to give buffs to specific fleet members (similar to the way friendly logistics ships work).

With these changes if your command ship off grid you will receive a smaller, yet still significant passive bonus. If active on field they can give specific fleet members improved bonuses. Who you give these improved bonuses would be completely up the player discretion. Just in the same you may commend someone on their logistics skills you would praise your command ship pilot for his tactical awareness.

Fleets would benefit from multiple command ships on grid perhaps focusing on different areas of the fight, ensuring that your lachesis are getting point range and that the primary is getting their tank resistances buffed. As their buffs wouldn't stack there would be a natural "command-ship:fleet count" ratio. Too many command ships and you are losing DPS and not gaining additional buffs.

To prevent a command ship from just sitting afk after providing links to the important targets, the modules could be balanced via cap usage. Running 2 or 3 links permanently and pulsing the other for niche situations so you don't run out of cap.

Examples

Is that interdictor running in to get a bubble on their fleet? He can call out, and I buff his tank and speed before he makes his run in.

My fleet member is getting premiered? I can give him buff to his active resists and then give a buff to my logistics friend to give him stronger and faster reps.

Not only does this address the issue of off-grid boosts but adds a new active role for pilots to interact with allies who can make meaningful decisions.

PS: give them bonused guns like a marauder so they have enough high slots to fit link modules and still have respectable damage

Edit 1: Added Cap usage to prevent AFK running of all links.
Edit 2: Added "No decision = No fun" section from post in the thread.

I'll do you one better on the targeted buff idea.
If a pilot wants the Boosts they have to target the command ship, call it a data link or what ever.
You gain some things.
1) you tie up a Lock on the ship receiving the boosts.
2) you limit the range a boosts can be passed by the virtue of lock range.
3) you can now jam/damp out boosts.
4) would require boosts to be on grid and mobile.
5) pilot receiving boost may inadvertently FF the booster.

any other sort of targeted buff/boost just seems like logi to me. and we are looking for other ideas.
Leadership skills would remain the same.
module power level would remain the same.
all you would really need to do is have a check in targeting that says "is this ship I am locked my fleet booster"
Y = boosts,
N = no boosts for you!
out of range, no boosts.
off grid, no boosts,
jammed/damped, no boosts.

The concept is a little too narrow for what boosters are used for. The idea is ok but it's pretty limiting that the booster turns solely into a targeting buffbot (ain't much different to its current duty of afk alt buffbot), but it needs a better concept.

love it.
+1

Well the pilot could fit Sensor boosters if he was flying with frigates or they could communicate with their fleet mates and watch the fight to see who might be in need of help.

I'll leave specifics of fine balance as to what lock speed would be balanced but I am sure lock speed is an important metric.

Cut the train time in half and sure. Otherwise they need to be aoe at least. -1

It does depend on how powerful they are, but arguably all link scale too strongly with SP. Due to the way skill requirement for modules/implants and the way bonuses are calculated there is a massive discrepancy between low and high SP links.

In a redesign I would like to see the route that CCP took with adding T1 logi frigs and cruisers. T1 logi arent as strong as T2 but are more cost effective.

The reason I've shied away from a projected AoE effect is:

1. CCP has confirmed that a large constant AoE ping would be too taxing on the servers during large fleet fights
2. Small projected AoE reinforces people anchoring instead of flying their own ships.
3. AoE is less engaging, you just turn it on and forget about it. You have no reason to do anything differently depending on the situation. Its important to give players meaningful decisions, its what makes gameplay interesting

I like it.

Now, a couple of thoughts... All Command Ships should get 8 high slots, with four turret or launcher hardpoints (100% weapon bonus). Each targeted command link boosts all three attributes for that type (siege, armor, skirmish, information, mining). For example, when I activate the targeted siege boost module on a ship, it gets the benefit to cycle time, cap use, and resistances. Thus, each command ship can buff 4-8 other ships, depending on whether it gives up damage potential.

No more than one targeted link module of the same type applies to the targeted ship (e.g. If multiple siege link modules target the ship, only the strongest one applies).

Training time gets considerably reduced, but the modules get stronger the higher you train the skills. One possibility is that training the skill higher lets you buff at a longer range. Perhaps at Siege Warfare Specialist V you could buff at up to 250 km (still subject to lock range of course). Or whatever range is appropriate...

The T1 Battle Cruisers also get similar treatment. They all get 8 high slots, with 6 weapon hardpoints and an appropriate damage bonus.

Add another T2 destroyer hull, which can provide smaller boosts, but can keep up with frigate gangs and enter the appropriate FW plexes.

I like the flexibility of going up to eight. If someone wants to basically have one CS per squad of logistics ships, that's an option. In the alternative, that person could also choose to put both Siege and Skirmish bonuses on only 2-4 ships. Either way, it brings the CS on grid and makes the pilot take an active role in keeping his friends alive.

Also, it goes without saying that the Command Processor would need to be repurposed or go away completely.

As for the Tech 3 Cruisers, they retain the slightly weaker bonuses to three different boost types, but are limited to six max high slots in a boosting configuration.

How is this different than flying a Logistics ship? No one ever complains that flying a Logistics ship is boring.