These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

offgrid boosts

Author
Tornii
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#61 - 2015-12-01 17:45:35 UTC
CCP showed they're smart enough to prioritise the game's long-term health over immediate subscription numbers when they introduced Jump Fatigue and the new sov system.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#62 - 2015-12-01 18:04:54 UTC
They should just re-think the whole boosting system from the ground up. The boosting ship will always be a single point of failure in a fleet unless you can :

1- Field enough to replace losses
2- Manage to somehow have a dude moving dead booster and replacement booster and giving appropriate roles mid fight.

The entire ship class dedicated to boosting is a bad idea as it automatically paint a huge bulls-eye on any guy flying them unless you somehow have a full doctrine of them. With the info available when you enter grid (ship class are freely available to anyone on the grid so there is no searching for who the link guy is) and the complete lack of cover/formation to minimize the exposure of your link guy, he will always get targeted first unless the enemy fleet know they can just snow-plow your entire fleet out of the way.

Removing off-grid is a good idea but the system as a whole is still flawed imo.

Hell in WWI, Manfred von Richthofen entire unit ended up being painted red because somehow, they found out having your unit leader stand out so drastically from the rest of the unit might not be a good idea. Thousand of years later in EVE, the ship designers decided we might as well redo the whole unique ship for command while identifying unique units is even easier than before because our instrument tells us each class of ship each target is because :reasons: .

/rant
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#63 - 2015-12-01 18:28:49 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
They should just re-think the whole boosting system from the ground up. The boosting ship will always be a single point of failure in a fleet unless you can :

1- Field enough to replace losses
2- Manage to somehow have a dude moving dead booster and replacement booster and giving appropriate roles mid fight.

The entire ship class dedicated to boosting is a bad idea as it automatically paint a huge bulls-eye on any guy flying them unless you somehow have a full doctrine of them. With the info available when you enter grid (ship class are freely available to anyone on the grid so there is no searching for who the link guy is) and the complete lack of cover/formation to minimize the exposure of your link guy, he will always get targeted first unless the enemy fleet know they can just snow-plow your entire fleet out of the way.

Removing off-grid is a good idea but the system as a whole is still flawed imo.

Hell in WWI, Manfred von Richthofen entire unit ended up being painted red because somehow, they found out having your unit leader stand out so drastically from the rest of the unit might not be a good idea. Thousand of years later in EVE, the ship designers decided we might as well redo the whole unique ship for command while identifying unique units is even easier than before because our instrument tells us each class of ship each target is because :reasons: .

/rant



Exactly this.

This is also why for all its flaws, the OGB system worked at the large scale.

Now I'm not saying for a minute that OGB was good, I'm saying for large scale it will be better than the alternate proposed if nothing else is done.

Those lines have their fair share of ifs, but and maybes but fudamentally it's true.

In fact, it may prove most efficient to have a super tanked carrier running links freely refitting as the HPs drop as it wont have a timer. I think it is fair to say no-one wants that reality.
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#64 - 2015-12-01 18:31:59 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
They should just re-think the whole boosting system from the ground up. The boosting ship will always be a single point of failure in a fleet unless you can :

1- Field enough to replace losses
2- Manage to somehow have a dude moving dead booster and replacement booster and giving appropriate roles mid fight.

The entire ship class dedicated to boosting is a bad idea as it automatically paint a huge bulls-eye on any guy flying them unless you somehow have a full doctrine of them. With the info available when you enter grid (ship class are freely available to anyone on the grid so there is no searching for who the link guy is) and the complete lack of cover/formation to minimize the exposure of your link guy, he will always get targeted first unless the enemy fleet know they can just snow-plow your entire fleet out of the way.

Removing off-grid is a good idea but the system as a whole is still flawed imo.

Hell in WWI, Manfred von Richthofen entire unit ended up being painted red because somehow, they found out having your unit leader stand out so drastically from the rest of the unit might not be a good idea. Thousand of years later in EVE, the ship designers decided we might as well redo the whole unique ship for command while identifying unique units is even easier than before because our instrument tells us each class of ship each target is because :reasons: .

/rant



Exactly this.

This is also why for all its flaws, the OGB system worked at the large scale.

Now I'm not saying for a minute that OGB was good, I'm saying for large scale it will be better than the alternate proposed if nothing else is done.

Those lines have their fair share of ifs, but and maybes but fudamentally it's true.

In fact, it may prove most efficient to have a super tanked carrier running links freely refitting as the HPs drop as it wont have a timer. I think it is fair to say no-one wants that reality.


For the bit about replacing boosters, ccp said in the vid that part of it would be ease of backup boosters so whatever that means?

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#65 - 2015-12-01 18:36:05 UTC
It's irrelevant though, unless you're fully running a purebread sleipnir doctrine for example.

Primary all the command ships and keep doing so until they stop appearing on grid.

I might train my link dude into carriers if they keep the tank. Brick tanked archon booster anyone? Certainly weaker than command ship links but supremely hard to alpha off field by comparison and can be repped just as hard as that command ship by the fleet.
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#66 - 2015-12-01 18:47:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Markus Reese
End of day, somebody will always be primary. A good fleet tactic would be ignore the command ships, take out their dps. Else could be wasting a ton or firepower while enemy takes out all yours.

Bricked tank archon I have as well. Dual linked, smartbombed, quite sturdy. In smaller engagements, triage mode even. Command with RR is the secondary

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#67 - 2015-12-01 18:53:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Morrigan LeSante
Yes somebody will be.

But this is like being a small gang with a single logi - guess who gets shot first?

Suitonia ran some numbers showing mathematically the difference they make. It's insane, you haveto break the links first.

Ed: Found it:

https://suitonia.wordpress.com/2015/08/25/links-part-2-just-how-broken-are-links-maths-and-words-edition/
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#68 - 2015-12-01 18:57:43 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Yes somebody will be.

But this is like being a small gang with a single logi - guess who gets shot first?

Suitona (sp?) did an article recently about how hard these scale on CZ. I'll try and dig out out.


Whay you speak of is a pretty big secondary with alpha, tackle and such. The whole everybody press F1 is a common bottom line for many of these issues. Logistics, ecm, command ships, dictors and hictors, etc.

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#69 - 2015-12-01 19:17:51 UTC
Read the linked article, here is a snippet:

10 RLML caracals shoot a fleet stiletto being repped by 3 scimis

No links: it dies in 8 seconds (reasonable, it is 10 RLML caracals...after all).
Links: They can't break reps.

In fact 15 of them would take 20 seconds to break the linked ship. 50% more DPS on field to kill it more than twice as slowly.

Links are that strong which I keep saying they will be public enemy #1 if the enemy FC isn't either a) dumb or b) at the helm of absolutely overwhelming firepower.
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#70 - 2015-12-01 19:39:39 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Read the linked article, here is a snippet:

10 RLML caracals shoot a fleet stiletto being repped by 3 scimis

No links: it dies in 8 seconds (reasonable, it is 10 RLML caracals...after all).
Links: They can't break reps.

In fact 15 of them would take 20 seconds to break the linked ship. 50% more DPS on field to kill it more than twice as slowly.

Links are that strong which I keep saying they will be public enemy #1 if the enemy FC isn't either a) dumb or b) at the helm of absolutely overwhelming firepower.


What is the difference without three scimis?

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Aplysia Vejun
Children of Agasul
#71 - 2015-12-01 19:43:33 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:


Links are that strong which I keep saying they will be public enemy #1 if the enemy FC isn't either a) dumb or b) at the helm of absolutely overwhelming firepower.

Best argument FOR removing OGB.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#72 - 2015-12-01 19:49:27 UTC
Markus Reese wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Yes somebody will be.

But this is like being a small gang with a single logi - guess who gets shot first?

Suitona (sp?) did an article recently about how hard these scale on CZ. I'll try and dig out out.


Whay you speak of is a pretty big secondary with alpha, tackle and such. The whole everybody press F1 is a common bottom line for many of these issues. Logistics, ecm, command ships, dictors and hictors, etc.


Repalcing a fleet booster require another ship out of doctrine with a dedicated fits that is likely to be less than stellar at combat. The "secondary" fleet booster waiting for his buddy is reduced to be a non-optimised dps while not operating the role his actual fit is intended for. The 17th logi on the other hand, might just be there as buffer for expected losses but still perform 100% of a logi duty he is fitted for. So does most support ships in the fleet. The boosting dude? Those high slots fitted with links sure provide a lot while not selected as booster for the fleet right? So the the over the top tank probably fit to give a chance of ever holding on grid.

Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#73 - 2015-12-01 19:50:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Morrigan LeSante
Markus Reese wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Read the linked article, here is a snippet:

10 RLML caracals shoot a fleet stiletto being repped by 3 scimis

No links: it dies in 8 seconds (reasonable, it is 10 RLML caracals...after all).
Links: They can't break reps.

In fact 15 of them would take 20 seconds to break the linked ship. 50% more DPS on field to kill it more than twice as slowly.

Links are that strong which I keep saying they will be public enemy #1 if the enemy FC isn't either a) dumb or b) at the helm of absolutely overwhelming firepower.


What is the difference without three scimis?



It's not done that way in the article but there is this:


Number of Caracals Stiletto Unlinked time to die Stiletto Linked time to die
2 22.39s 43.05s (will survive into double reload if it heats)
5 8.96s 17.42s


Have a read of it.

Links rival high grade snakes/slaves/etc in terms of effectiveness.


More fun times snippets:

Quote:
One thing worth pointing out, is that a Linked Raven has more EHP with just 2 invuls fitted than a Raven would if it had 7 Invuls fitted.


Ship Name Meta MWD fitted. No Implants < With MG Snakes < With HG Snakes < With Rapid Deployment
Caracal 1897m/s 2201m/s 2345m/s 2383m/s


Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#74 - 2015-12-01 20:30:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Markus Reese
I am out and about, so will need to review and crunch stuff in a few hours when back home. The power of links vs no links, cannot argue in and of itself. I think I give like 38% boost with three links in my on grid, tq damnation.

The bit of two invuln plus link vs seven invuln does make me lose credit in the article. I missed the link, oops. Reason is stacking penalties. link doesnt stack penalty. No arguements that the defence ones at very least arent the most powerful force multiplier in game. Hence testing, balance and mechanics so that it, and other force multipliers aren a must primary. Which is why i am focusing on potential ways to improve, and not assume it will be a black and white off grid to on grid.

As for the "wasted" backup, that is your call as FC. A few lower dps secondary commands, or a higher dps but risk being outdone by loss of boosters. Eve is risk, fleet composition is changing. Not going to be nor should it be, homogeneous composition

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

SurrenderMonkey
The Exchange Collective
Solyaris Chtonium
#75 - 2015-12-01 21:13:49 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Aplysia Vejun wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:


Links are that strong which I keep saying they will be public enemy #1 if the enemy FC isn't either a) dumb or b) at the helm of absolutely overwhelming firepower.

Best argument FOR removing OGB.



Really, I haven't seen an act of contortion so impressive since I last went to a Cirque du Soleil show.

"Links are so amazingly strong that they're completely useless unless they are completely removed from being in harm's way!"

From what they briefly said on stream, the plan is to turn them into an AOE that gives a buff with a duration. There's also the possibility for debuff effects.

Even based on this little bit of information, the belief that it's going to be today's links, just forced on-grid, seems rather obtuse.

Yeah, if you have one ship inflating the tank of an entire fleet to epic proportions, that guy has to go, but it's pretty unlikely that the new links are going to be that strong, and they certainly won't be single-ship force multipliers for an entire fleet, so that argument is rendered moot.

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see the absolute magnitude of the effects toned down considerably, as well. They're drastically beyond what they would need to be for a booster per squad to be efficient, synergy-wise - the only reason they aren't is because it's unnecessary.

Properly nerfed, they could turn into an interesting and diverse support role instead of that-alt-that-you-have-to-have-just-because-the-other-guy-has-one-too.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Madd Adda
#76 - 2015-12-01 21:34:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Madd Adda
Black Pedro wrote:
Madd Adda wrote:
i don't mind the removal of ogb used for pvp, but only on two conditions:
1.the passive effect of skills that impact fleet members while they are in fleet, such as leadership, continue to be offgrid
2. links that don't improve defensive/offensive/pvp support capability remain offgrid.

Why should invulnerable mining boosts from behind POS shields remain a thing?

Risk vs. reward remember? If you want a boost in yield, you should have to put something at risk. As it is, there is no game decisions to be made - a mining booster is 100% safe so it is mandatory for any competitive miner. This just adds an un-engaging cost to the profession and hurts new/casual players (kinda like PvP boosts).

There should be some risk in using a mining booster. I bet by the time the Drilling Platform structures are released, 100% safe boosts will no longer be a thing.


Aren't POSs/forcefields get discontinued in favor of citadels? seems like your issue won't be an issue for long.

some risk is one thing, nothing but risk and boosts go the way of the Rorqual. At present, max mining boosts aren't worth fielding an orca if it just gets blown up a minute after landing. So if you want the orca to be fielded, with on grid boosts,and at risk, buff the reward. that's my take at least.

Carebear extraordinaire

Sitting Bull Lakota
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
#77 - 2015-12-02 01:20:50 UTC
The Ginger Sith wrote:
Markus Reese wrote:
Point of this is that they lose say the 4500 accounts but gain 9000 single account holders?


If I can't use my ogb, I'll unsub all my accounts! So will everyone else! (paraphrase)


Can I have all y'all's stuff?
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#78 - 2015-12-02 01:34:02 UTC
Going to do some theorycrafting and opinions on how I would change ganglinks.

1. Bonuses and Debuffs. In the case off command ships and others that increase a bonus to the mindlink, I would have it so a bastion mode is required. Else is just a standard T1 bonus, fairly fair.

2. If AoE, I would try to have it possible so that the squad, wing and fleet command is area. say 2km per squad lvl (10 km rad) then 5km per wing (35km) and lastly, 10km per fleet (so total of 85km radius). Receive highest bonus.

This makes wide coverage of a lower bonus a fairly simple affair, but a wide and powerful coverage more vulnerable.

3. Remove fleet tree from the boosters....

Okay, this one is a toughie, but I would like to give a more viable role to these. I feel they should be changed so that your fleet, wing, squad command positions are given tools to command a battle. With large grids and tactical views, I would like to, I dare say, give these command postions a real time strategy role. This would require more value in non press F1 combat, but if the fleet tree is legal, as it works with bonuses now, The commander can give real time commands that will show in space for the playes of the fleet.

The idea is simple, the FC can give orders on a fleet, wing or squad level. These would be like waypoints in space the commander can move or lock to targets. From there, wing commanders and the fleet commanders can connect off secondary waypoints or targets. Lastly, squads can issue their own unique in space and overview pathing and tags.

This is very much an, in my dreams sort of play, but it would allow for better and more complex non voice commands. Real time waypoints in the x/y/z axis that are on grid for that fleet. It also means the command positions actually are command positions now, not boost positions. The boosting just becomes a secondary like logistics. And like logistics should be, exists in two modes. A mild, but mobile and veratile, or a locked in but powerful.

So feedback from FCs, would you like to be able to give and make real time command directives in space if squad vs squad combat became viable and more effective?

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#79 - 2015-12-02 01:34:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Markus Reese
Sitting Bull Lakota wrote:
The Ginger Sith wrote:
Markus Reese wrote:
Point of this is that they lose say the 4500 accounts but gain 9000 single account holders?


If I can't use my ogb, I'll unsub all my accounts! So will everyone else! (paraphrase)


Can I have all y'all's stuff?



Hate making two posts in a row, but this is worth it.


WOO HOO! Cheap command ships flooding market... soon.

Edit addition:

Also, I re-listened to the question in the video and answer. Time based AoE, if so, it could be a set it off, and if you pop the ship, doesn't matter. Boosts received. Pop command ship to prevent a re-cycle depending on how it works.

Five minute cycle timer and say like a 30 second boost is ? Like a temporary powerup unless you have many.

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#80 - 2015-12-02 03:39:13 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Can you fit me a workable eos, astarte, claymore or sleipnir which has even 75% of a comparable damnations levels of survivability, please?

I sort of can--not Sleipnir, but the other three. Sleipnir doesn't have the proper defensive slot set up (6/4 or 4/6), as it has 5/5. I do feel that hit point skill bonuses should be standardized to 7.5% per level while armor repairer and shield booster skill bonuses should be standardized to 10% per level, but it's no huge divide like many suggest.


All of these fits have max skills, no boosters, no implants except for mindlink, and unequal but comparable and affordable fitting prices. All modules and rigs added together should cost less than the hull.



Claymore attributes:
Effective Hit Points: 79,574
Shield EHP: 57,100
Shield HP: 9919
Average shield resistance: x5.757
Shield max regen: 2235
Shield max regen (overheated): 2820
Shield sustained regen: 1634
Total DPS: 327


Eos attributes:
Effective Hit Points: 156,852
Armor EHP: 131,421
Armor HP: 17,078
Average armor resistance: x7.696
Armor max regen: 1231
Armor max regen (overheated): 1593
Armor sustained regen: 744
Total DPS: 484


Damnation attributes:
Effective Hit Points: 391,038
Armor EHP: 367,117
Armor HP: 39,434
Average armor resistance: x9.31
Armor max regen: 0
Armor max regen (overheated): 0
Armor sustained regen: 0
Total DPS: 265

Here, the Damnation is the clear winner by a large margin in raw buffer tank, while the Claymore boasts tremendous shield boost rate. The Eos sits uncomfortably in the middle between the two but has its damage output less affected by the defense-centric fit. Still, it could be useful when you're not sure whether you need buffer or repair more. The Damnation and Eos also benefit from having the 1600mm armor plate as a fitting option, whereas the Claymore is limited to the Large Shield Extender which is more comparable to an 800mm armor plate. Now this is offset by the far weaker active tank that the Eos has, but I don't think that's a fair comparison. While I do feel armor repairers should be a lot slower than shield boosters, and armor plates should offer more hit points than shield extenders, the difference is too strong and the large shield extender is overpowered for its size, so I'd like to see a rebalance of all three of these things. Lastly, logi will rep the Damnation a lot faster than the Eos or Claymore so much so that if you have only one logi repping the command ship, the Damnation becomes a clear winner in both categories. That is a problem with overpowered logi, not the design of the command ships.

In the end, each ship fits into its role. If buffer tank is what you need, then the Damnation is a clear winner for you. But if you really need fast onboard regen, look no further than the Claymore. I'd say the Damnation is probably going to be the better pick for almost any medium or large fleet, but in small gangs the Claymore will do best and the Eos will also be popular for its improved damage output. If the skill bonus changes I mentioned above were put into play, then the ships would line up even closer with each other.




[Claymore, New Setup 1]
Capacitor Flux Coil II
Capacitor Flux Coil II
Capacitor Flux Coil II
Damage Control II

Large F-S9 Regolith Compact Shield Extender
Kinetic Deflection Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Shield Boost Amplifier II
Pith X-Type Large Shield Booster
10MN Y-S8 Compact Afterburner

Siege Warfare Link - Active Shielding II
Siege Warfare Link - Shield Efficiency II
Siege Warfare Link - Shield Harmonizing II
Upgraded 'Malkuth' Heavy Assault Missile Launcher I, Mjolnir Heavy Assault Missile
Upgraded 'Malkuth' Heavy Assault Missile Launcher I, Mjolnir Heavy Assault Missile
Upgraded 'Malkuth' Heavy Assault Missile Launcher I, Mjolnir Heavy Assault Missile
Upgraded 'Malkuth' Heavy Assault Missile Launcher I, Mjolnir Heavy Assault Missile

Medium Core Defense Operational Solidifier II
Medium Capacitor Control Circuit II

Hammerhead II x5





[Eos, New Setup 1]
1600mm Steel Plates II
Medium Ancillary Armor Repairer, Nanite Repair Paste
Corelum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Corelum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Corpus X-Type Armor Explosive Hardener
Damage Control II

Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Script
Cap Recharger II
Cap Recharger II
10MN Afterburner II

Armored Warfare Link - Damage Control II
Armored Warfare Link - Passive Defense II
Armored Warfare Link - Rapid Repair II
200mm Prototype Gauss Gun, Antimatter Charge M
200mm Prototype Gauss Gun, Antimatter Charge M
200mm Prototype Gauss Gun, Antimatter Charge M

Medium Nanobot Accelerator II
Medium Trimark Armor Pump II

Berserker II x5




[Damnation, New Setup 1]
1600mm Rolled Tungsten Compact Plates
1600mm Rolled Tungsten Compact Plates
Armor Thermic Hardener II
Corelum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Corelum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Damage Control II

Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Script
ECM Burst II
ECM Burst II
10MN Y-S8 Compact Afterburner

Armored Warfare Link - Damage Control II
Armored Warfare Link - Passive Defense II
Armored Warfare Link - Rapid Repair II
Rapid Light Missile Launcher II, Mjolnir Light Missile
Rapid Light Missile Launcher II, Mjolnir Light Missile
Rapid Light Missile Launcher II, Mjolnir Light Missile
Rapid Light Missile Launcher II, Mjolnir Light Missile

Medium Trimark Armor Pump II
Medium Trimark Armor Pump II

Hammerhead II x5

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."