These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

A thought about Boosters:
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#121 - 2015-07-17 09:37:58 UTC
A malediction can go 13km/s oerrheated. It really doesnt matter where on grid you put you links. Links on grid is a disaster for smaller groups.

And if you meant command battlecruisers, dont say command cruisers. Cruisers are a different class entirely.
Legatus1982
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#122 - 2015-07-17 16:23:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Legatus1982
IbanezLaney wrote:
People who complain about off grid boosts don't realize that if CCP removes them they will be in a much worse off position.


Example:

I'm sitting in a medium plex.

You come to pew pew because 1v1 in an MMO is smart and how it's ment to be played.

I tackle and decloak a falcon because my boost toon is now more useful as an ECM pilot.


That will be the new reality.

Don't think you'll be safe in novice or small plexes either.
99% of frigate fights last long enough for the cloaking lock delay to be well and truly over making a cloaking Griffin very viable. (I have tested this and the tears flowed way more than when I use boosts)


So yeah - keep asking for boosts on grid people. Then you can start complaining about the next thing until all that is left are the things that suit your solo play style in an MMO. Or you could buy Elite Dangerous and get that now. Cool



This was a good attempt at trolling the thread for your own profit.

Here's the real difference: you have a falcon alt sitting on grid with you. Guess what he doesn't have protecting him? A nearby station to dock in immediately at the first sign of trouble.

Now your alt is required to place himself in the vulnerable position of being killed to boost your main. Which is exactly how it should be.

We all know the real end result of your scenario: the falcon alt works a few times and gets you a few kills. Then someone with a well executed plan kills your falcon and you're out one recon plus fittings and you get a ****** insurance payout of 5% of the total ship cost as your consolation prize.

Or are you going to suggest that all these multi boxers who could already be putting a falcon on grid are not doing so out of the kindness of their bleeding hearts and intentionally choosing to go with the links instead? We all know which advantage is not only less risky but also outright more beneficial to the main as a whole.

Regarding the best way to fix this, I think may arethusa has a great solution, minus the beacon. Those ships are probably sitting on a station or pos anyways, just make the links work with timers like a cyno or similar so it doesn't become immune to attacks. Because currently you could run a script to have your alt jump around between 100 different safe spots and never be in danger. A cyno mechanic for links would fix that. Just make the timer shorter or longer as needed to balance.
Demerius Xenocratus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#123 - 2015-07-17 16:58:55 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
A malediction can go 13km/s oerrheated. It really doesnt matter where on grid you put you links. Links on grid is a disaster for smaller groups.

And if you meant command battlecruisers, dont say command cruisers. Cruisers are a different class entirely.


Have your links protected by a griffin or as I said before by ships designed to kill fast frigates. Use some tactics besides just constant hit and run trying to pick off stragglers. Battlecruisers can now fit MMJD also which opens up new possibilities. We might see people actually using things like damnations and nighthawks on grid for their intended purpose which would add a new element to fights. Those ships can sport a massive tank so in a relatively even fleet fight, primarying them might turn out to be a poor choice.

If you are that badly outnumbered that your ongrid links are not survivable, you shouldn't win. That's not how the game works. Numbers are supposed to matter and you should not be able to play a trump card which the enemy can't devote resources to removing. Adding any sort of timer to links will have nearly the same effect as suddenly it will be far more viable for an FC to send pilots after your links.

As it stands now a small gang or solo pilot can use links in near complete safety while playing kitey games with superior numbers.
There's no other advantage-gaining mechanism in the game that is so low risk and afk-able. The mere fact that people actually lose link ships at all with the current mechanic is a testament to pilots' faith in the protective potential of stargates and stations.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#124 - 2015-07-17 17:59:00 UTC
Legatus1982 wrote:
IbanezLaney wrote:
People who complain about off grid boosts don't realize that if CCP removes them they will be in a much worse off position.


Example:

I'm sitting in a medium plex.

You come to pew pew because 1v1 in an MMO is smart and how it's ment to be played.

I tackle and decloak a falcon because my boost toon is now more useful as an ECM pilot.


That will be the new reality.

Don't think you'll be safe in novice or small plexes either.
99% of frigate fights last long enough for the cloaking lock delay to be well and truly over making a cloaking Griffin very viable. (I have tested this and the tears flowed way more than when I use boosts)


So yeah - keep asking for boosts on grid people. Then you can start complaining about the next thing until all that is left are the things that suit your solo play style in an MMO. Or you could buy Elite Dangerous and get that now. Cool



This was a good attempt at trolling the thread for your own profit.

Here's the real difference: you have a falcon alt sitting on grid with you. Guess what he doesn't have protecting him? A nearby station to dock in immediately at the first sign of trouble.

Now your alt is required to place himself in the vulnerable position of being killed to boost your main. Which is exactly how it should be.

We all know the real end result of your scenario: the falcon alt works a few times and gets you a few kills. Then someone with a well executed plan kills your falcon and you're out one recon plus fittings and you get a ****** insurance payout of 5% of the total ship cost as your consolation prize.

Or are you going to suggest that all these multi boxers who could already be putting a falcon on grid are not doing so out of the kindness of their bleeding hearts and intentionally choosing to go with the links instead? We all know which advantage is not only less risky but also outright more beneficial to the main as a whole.

Regarding the best way to fix this, I think may arethusa has a great solution, minus the beacon. Those ships are probably sitting on a station or pos anyways, just make the links work with timers like a cyno or similar so it doesn't become immune to attacks. Because currently you could run a script to have your alt jump around between 100 different safe spots and never be in danger. A cyno mechanic for links would fix that. Just make the timer shorter or longer as needed to balance.


Links turn off when you warp, so I'm not sure your 100 safe spot warpy script is well thought out. Are you advocating botting activities?
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#125 - 2015-07-17 18:41:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
A malediction can go 13km/s oerrheated. It really doesnt matter where on grid you put you links. Links on grid is a disaster for smaller groups.

And if you meant command battlecruisers, dont say command cruisers. Cruisers are a different class entirely.


Have your links protected by a griffin or as I said before by ships designed to kill fast frigates. Use some tactics besides just constant hit and run trying to pick off stragglers. Battlecruisers can now fit MMJD also which opens up new possibilities. We might see people actually using things like damnations and nighthawks on grid for their intended purpose which would add a new element to fights. Those ships can sport a massive tank so in a relatively even fleet fight, primarying them might turn out to be a poor choice.

If you are that badly outnumbered that your ongrid links are not survivable, you shouldn't win. That's not how the game works. Numbers are supposed to matter and you should not be able to play a trump card which the enemy can't devote resources to removing. Adding any sort of timer to links will have nearly the same effect as suddenly it will be far more viable for an FC to send pilots after your links.

As it stands now a small gang or solo pilot can use links in near complete safety while playing kitey games with superior numbers.
There's no other advantage-gaining mechanism in the game that is so low risk and afk-able. The mere fact that people actually lose link ships at all with the current mechanic is a testament to pilots' faith in the protective potential of stargates and stations.


Every larger fight is decided by a group of frigates. What a wonderful vision you have for eve.

And as i have stated before, You are complaining about the current status quo in a thread that has proposed some specific changes to address the security of boosters on station and gates. Now, if you are suggesting that it is unfair that someone with 2 accounts has an advantage ofer someone with 1 who may be thinking hes about to get some trusolo, then there i have to remind you what game you are playing. Personally, i always assume the target is as well, or better prepared than i am myself.

If one person brings a booster, its not unreasonable to expect the other party to bring a prober. I know its very tempting for people such as yourself to have a massive im[pact on all other levels of PVP in eve just to get a fair 1v1. But mechanics already exist to get fair 1v1s, its called a fleet invite and warping to a safe spot or dueling in high sec with all the other scrubs. That incidentally is the correct way to use the term scrub :)
Estella Osoka
Cranky Bitches Who PMS
#126 - 2015-07-17 18:53:11 UTC
On-grid or off-grid, I really don't care. I just want the booster alt on the killmail so the a-hole who just beat me can't say he solo'd me.
Legatus1982
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#127 - 2015-07-17 18:56:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Legatus1982
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Legatus1982 wrote:
IbanezLaney wrote:
People who complain about off grid boosts don't realize that if CCP removes them they will be in a much worse off position.


Example:

I'm sitting in a medium plex.

You come to pew pew because 1v1 in an MMO is smart and how it's ment to be played.

I tackle and decloak a falcon because my boost toon is now more useful as an ECM pilot.


That will be the new reality.

Don't think you'll be safe in novice or small plexes either.
99% of frigate fights last long enough for the cloaking lock delay to be well and truly over making a cloaking Griffin very viable. (I have tested this and the tears flowed way more than when I use boosts)


So yeah - keep asking for boosts on grid people. Then you can start complaining about the next thing until all that is left are the things that suit your solo play style in an MMO. Or you could buy Elite Dangerous and get that now. Cool



This was a good attempt at trolling the thread for your own profit.

Here's the real difference: you have a falcon alt sitting on grid with you. Guess what he doesn't have protecting him? A nearby station to dock in immediately at the first sign of trouble.

Now your alt is required to place himself in the vulnerable position of being killed to boost your main. Which is exactly how it should be.

We all know the real end result of your scenario: the falcon alt works a few times and gets you a few kills. Then someone with a well executed plan kills your falcon and you're out one recon plus fittings and you get a ****** insurance payout of 5% of the total ship cost as your consolation prize.

Or are you going to suggest that all these multi boxers who could already be putting a falcon on grid are not doing so out of the kindness of their bleeding hearts and intentionally choosing to go with the links instead? We all know which advantage is not only less risky but also outright more beneficial to the main as a whole.

Regarding the best way to fix this, I think may arethusa has a great solution, minus the beacon. Those ships are probably sitting on a station or pos anyways, just make the links work with timers like a cyno or similar so it doesn't become immune to attacks. Because currently you could run a script to have your alt jump around between 100 different safe spots and never be in danger. A cyno mechanic for links would fix that. Just make the timer shorter or longer as needed to balance.


Links turn off when you warp, so I'm not sure your 100 safe spot warpy script is well thought out. Are you advocating botting activities?



I was thinking more along the lines of a fleet with the t3c links as booster + wing command leadership 5 and supporting skills. I'm not too familiar with links alts though and didn't know links turn off in warp like that.

Main thing is that the links should be vulnerable to attack while linking and at risk of being killed before it docks, not just able to enter pos shield or dock or warp off at the first sign of danger with almost no risk by someone with two accounts. They are providing significant bonuses and should carry an equally heavy risk, but one that a fleet could manage while such a links boat is doing its intended job: buffing a fleet in a fleet engagement. And it should also make little sense to deploy these things for individuals or dangerous for small gangs. So as may suggested a timer like a cyno ship or a bastion marauder or like the new entosis modules would go a long way towards making this system work. Fleets could deploy the links at will when they are needed, but would have to protect the provider and be capable of supporting that role.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#128 - 2015-07-17 19:01:52 UTC
Lucky for you matey, someone who does know a little about links has already suggested a solution to this, its in the very first post in this very thread.
Demerius Xenocratus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#129 - 2015-07-17 21:14:23 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
A malediction can go 13km/s oerrheated. It really doesnt matter where on grid you put you links. Links on grid is a disaster for smaller groups.

And if you meant command battlecruisers, dont say command cruisers. Cruisers are a different class entirely.


Have your links protected by a griffin or as I said before by ships designed to kill fast frigates. Use some tactics besides just constant hit and run trying to pick off stragglers. Battlecruisers can now fit MMJD also which opens up new possibilities. We might see people actually using things like damnations and nighthawks on grid for their intended purpose which would add a new element to fights. Those ships can sport a massive tank so in a relatively even fleet fight, primarying them might turn out to be a poor choice.

If you are that badly outnumbered that your ongrid links are not survivable, you shouldn't win. That's not how the game works. Numbers are supposed to matter and you should not be able to play a trump card which the enemy can't devote resources to removing. Adding any sort of timer to links will have nearly the same effect as suddenly it will be far more viable for an FC to send pilots after your links.

As it stands now a small gang or solo pilot can use links in near complete safety while playing kitey games with superior numbers.
There's no other advantage-gaining mechanism in the game that is so low risk and afk-able. The mere fact that people actually lose link ships at all with the current mechanic is a testament to pilots' faith in the protective potential of stargates and stations.


Every larger fight is decided by a group of frigates. What a wonderful vision you have for eve.

And as i have stated before, You are complaining about the current status quo in a thread that has proposed some specific changes to address the security of boosters on station and gates. Now, if you are suggesting that it is unfair that someone with 2 accounts has an advantage ofer someone with 1 who may be thinking hes about to get some trusolo, then there i have to remind you what game you are playing. Personally, i always assume the target is as well, or better prepared than i am myself.

If one person brings a booster, its not unreasonable to expect the other party to bring a prober. I know its very tempting for people such as yourself to have a massive im[pact on all other levels of PVP in eve just to get a fair 1v1. But mechanics already exist to get fair 1v1s, its called a fleet invite and warping to a safe spot or dueling in high sec with all the other scrubs. That incidentally is the correct way to use the term scrub :)



I've already said repeatedly I don't care if boosters are on-grid or not.

What I want is a situation where if I know that a pilot has links, I can bring some friends and put together a plan to convert that booster into a nice killmail. I want that to be viable as opposed to "lol dock."

Now, separate from that, using alts to mitigate risk and vastly increase the capabilities of one human player is pay to win. That is a fact. It's in the interests of the people who've paid for alts and more important CCP who collects the checks to maintain the status quo. The meta game revolves around the use of alts. I recognize that. The only reason I started that detour (aside from my own amusement) was in response to someone thinking that MMORPG somehow means "me and my alts vs. the world, and that making solo and small gang encounters an arms race of alts is a good thing.

If CCP wants to bring boosts on grid, it's their game. Some players would say they have a habit of using a sledgehammer where a screwdriver would suffice.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#130 - 2015-07-17 21:18:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
So you want the game to give you free intel rather than building your own situational awareness?

Ill start you off, i use boosts.

My JF alt is pay to win because he brings in ships for me to win with.
My cyno alts are pay to win because they help me get about the place.
My eyes are pay to win because they sometimes keep me safe.
My deplexing alts are pay to win because they ensure that i can dock in my station.
My oplexing alts make sure i dont run out of isk.

Lets be frank, there are a lot of roles that you wouldnt expect someone to focus on with their main from a gameplay perspective. There are a lot of roles that a main char cannot do given sec status and standing mechanics. Rather than having some misplaced puritanical notion that you can change eve into what you want it to be, why not embrace what it actually is? A terribly boring a limiting game when played as a single account/char.
Yang Aurilen
State War Academy
Caldari State
#131 - 2015-07-18 00:16:13 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
So you want the game to give you free intel rather than building your own situational awareness?

Ill start you off, i use boosts.

My JF alt is pay to win because he brings in ships for me to win with.
My cyno alts are pay to win because they help me get about the place.
My eyes are pay to win because they sometimes keep me safe.
My deplexing alts are pay to win because they ensure that i can dock in my station.
My oplexing alts make sure i dont run out of isk.

Lets be frank, there are a lot of roles that you wouldnt expect someone to focus on with their main from a gameplay perspective. There are a lot of roles that a main char cannot do given sec status and standing mechanics. Rather than having some misplaced puritanical notion that you can change eve into what you want it to be, why not embrace what it actually is? A terribly boring a limiting game when played as a single account/char.


That's a lot of words saying that multiple people is pay to win in the eyes of a true "solo" player. Change the word alt to friends and the message will say the same.Roll

Post with your NPC alt main and not your main main alt!
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#132 - 2015-07-18 00:27:36 UTC
Yang Aurilen wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
So you want the game to give you free intel rather than building your own situational awareness?

Ill start you off, i use boosts.

My JF alt is pay to win because he brings in ships for me to win with.
My cyno alts are pay to win because they help me get about the place.
My eyes are pay to win because they sometimes keep me safe.
My deplexing alts are pay to win because they ensure that i can dock in my station.
My oplexing alts make sure i dont run out of isk.

Lets be frank, there are a lot of roles that you wouldnt expect someone to focus on with their main from a gameplay perspective. There are a lot of roles that a main char cannot do given sec status and standing mechanics. Rather than having some misplaced puritanical notion that you can change eve into what you want it to be, why not embrace what it actually is? A terribly boring a limiting game when played as a single account/char.


That's a lot of words saying that multiple people is pay to win in the eyes of a true "solo" player. Change the word alt to friends and the message will say the same.Roll


if i wanted to express their message in the least possible words it would be;

"WHAAAAAAAA"

:p
Delightful Delicacy
Doomheim
#133 - 2015-07-18 16:29:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Delightful Delicacy
Ares Desideratus wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Aye, as ive said before about boosts going on grid. The strongest force in the area gets to keep boosts on grid, everyone else looses a booster every fight or just goes without them or avoids the fight.

Removing them completely would be a better solution when compared to on grid boosts.

Then we can finally move on to the same people complaining about how OP implants are in low sec.

Removing them completely would be by far the simplest solution.

Mostly, I am far too lazy to sit around trying to come up with effective ways to fix this issue.

I would rather they just get rid of the whole warfare link system, compensate us all with remaps for training the skills, and then we will be left with an even playing field. Nice and simple.


While at it they should just remove all variations of ships except for the ibis, remove all weapons except for T1 light ion blasters, and if that doesn't work, replace the game itself with pong. Then everyone will be equal and nobody can say it's not fair any more. Alternatively we could replace EVE with online bingo, and let the RNG decide who wins. Though I bet people would still whine about something.
Aerasia
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#134 - 2015-07-18 17:44:37 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
A malediction can go 13km/s oerrheated. It really doesnt matter where on grid you put you links. Links on grid is a disaster for smaller groups.
Why, because their ships might get blown up?

Are you sure you know what fights are for?
Demerius Xenocratus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#135 - 2015-07-19 00:46:37 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
So you want the game to give you free intel rather than building your own situational awareness?

Ill start you off, i use boosts.

My JF alt is pay to win because he brings in ships for me to win with.
My cyno alts are pay to win because they help me get about the place.
My eyes are pay to win because they sometimes keep me safe.
My deplexing alts are pay to win because they ensure that i can dock in my station.
My oplexing alts make sure i dont run out of isk.

Lets be frank, there are a lot of roles that you wouldnt expect someone to focus on with their main from a gameplay perspective. There are a lot of roles that a main char cannot do given sec status and standing mechanics. Rather than having some misplaced puritanical notion that you can change eve into what you want it to be, why not embrace what it actually is? A terribly boring a limiting game when played as a single account/char.


All that is pay to win to an extent yes. You are dropping real world cash to enhance your ingame capabilties.

However there's an obvious difference between someone that has multiple characters designed to operate in different parts of space to overcome standings/sec status mechanics and someone who wants to use multiple clients simultaneously to gain an advantage in the MMO aspect of the game without actually having to build relationships with other players. There's a big difference between having multiple characters intended to operate differently and having multiple accounts to allow oneself to compete in an MMO while still playing a single player game.

I'm not trying to change the game. The meta game is dominated by those with multiple accounts and lots of alts. I recognize that.
However I do play with one account/two characters and I don't find the game either boring or limiting. I do have to avoid fights with people who bring multiple accounts to bear against my one; well really only in the case of boosters because if I bring friends to gank them they can go from afk to safe with 1 click.
Demerius Xenocratus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#136 - 2015-07-19 00:48:16 UTC
Delightful Delicacy wrote:
Ares Desideratus wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Aye, as ive said before about boosts going on grid. The strongest force in the area gets to keep boosts on grid, everyone else looses a booster every fight or just goes without them or avoids the fight.

Removing them completely would be a better solution when compared to on grid boosts.

Then we can finally move on to the same people complaining about how OP implants are in low sec.

Removing them completely would be by far the simplest solution.

Mostly, I am far too lazy to sit around trying to come up with effective ways to fix this issue.

I would rather they just get rid of the whole warfare link system, compensate us all with remaps for training the skills, and then we will be left with an even playing field. Nice and simple.


While at it they should just remove all variations of ships except for the ibis, remove all weapons except for T1 light ion blasters, and if that doesn't work, replace the game itself with pong. Then everyone will be equal and nobody can say it's not fair any more. Alternatively we could replace EVE with online bingo, and let the RNG decide who wins. Though I bet people would still whine about something.


In-game choices, tactics and player coordination vs. Mastercard - which should have more influence on outcomes?

Your hyperbole seems to confuse the two.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#137 - 2015-07-19 04:07:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Because getting beaten by 1 person with 2 accounts is totally different to getting beaten by 2 people with 1 account.

CCP have conducted a horrible bait and switch, getting people to play their game based on endless stories of fairness, kindness, honesty and balance then dropping mechanics like this on us.

Its just so unfair, UNFAIR!?!?!, IN MY EVE?!?!?!

IF YOU WANT TO MOVE YOUR DAMN SUPERCAP SOMEWHERE TO HYPERDUNK SOME GUY THEN YOU SHOULD HAVE TO HAVE A FRIEND WITH A 'CYNO MAIN'.
Colt Blackhawk
Doomheim
#138 - 2015-07-19 05:55:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Colt Blackhawk
*grabbing popcorn*

Actually the title of thread is wrong.
"Crossi is whining" would match a lot better.

OGB is **** and the only peeps defending it are mostly noreallifers who forget that this is a game and want to dunk other people by pretending they are solo.
*waiting for Crossi don´t touch my ogb whining*

And plz can that the church of awesome guy who is also defending ogb not skalp me? I like his music :P

[09:04:53] Ashira Twilight > Plant the f****** amarr flag and s*** on their smoking wrecks.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#139 - 2015-07-19 06:05:23 UTC
Just trying to apply some consistency to people selective reasoning.
Colt Blackhawk
Doomheim
#140 - 2015-07-19 08:22:27 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Just trying to apply some consistency to people selective reasoning.

Shocked

Man you needed WHOLE 10 minutes for a reply.
Read the "norealifers" part of my post again Ugh

OGB is s*** mechanic because it does not appear on kb. It is too much benefit for almost no risk.
But as we all know CCP f... it completely up to get new people into the game, so their strategy is to get more and more alts and accounts in the game from the already existing players.

List of completely broken **** in eve:
-OGB
-FW bomber toon income (poor idiots ratting in a carrier in 0.0)
-Highsec ganking and wardeccing of noobs in highsec
-FW in general
-mining (I could be starring at a wall for 5h and it would be the same)
-This "funny" one man in a catalyst (and his 20 alts ofc not appearing on the kill) can kill a freighter in highsec stuff.
And so on.

OGB is on the top list because it kills especially new player experience (griefers in highsec using ogb wardec bears and dunk them godlike, lowsec 5 boxers almost NEVER engage other 5 boxers but search for noobish 1boxers etc...)

[09:04:53] Ashira Twilight > Plant the f****** amarr flag and s*** on their smoking wrecks.