These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Why do off grid links exist?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#201 - 2015-12-05 03:03:00 UTC
Hes a consciousness objector. Like all pacifists though, he is required to pay his tax.
Demerius Xenocratus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#202 - 2015-12-05 09:35:59 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Yes, CCP say your possible solution to having links far away on a huge grid by explaining that they will most likely work inside a small AOE. RIP skirmish gangs (apart from with t2 dessy pending details)

Not to mention that trying to have on-grid-boosts away from fleet not only makes a mockery of the whole concept for these changes but it will simply be too vulnerable to death squads of 3rd parties who can simply harass boosters 5000km away from he fight.

All the proposed changes and new ships have the potential to be an utter mess when combined together in anything but small scale fights. You argue for a deeper strategy, but i would suggest that what you will get is unpredictable uncertainty instead.


Skirmish gangs don't require links unless you're terrible.
Demerius Xenocratus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#203 - 2015-12-05 09:44:25 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Boosts are not god mode.

Also, i do not have an alt, i have a friend that i fly with some time. I hope this alleviates your concerns.


If a 25-35% buff to speed, targeting range, sig radius reduction, tackle range, EHP and sensor strength isn't pretty close to god mode I don't know what is. Compared to every other means of increasing stats whether it be drugs, implants, faction modules, fully trained skills...the advantage gained from boosts is absolutely nuts.

When I see your "friend" flying around fighting while you are at work or sleeping I'll take you seriously. You pay CCP extra money to make your space pixels better. At least have the intellectual honesty to admit that.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The goal is players in space, not ships in space. 50 humans facing off is far more interesting than 2 players controlling 25 ships each. EVE is allegedly an MMO. It is not an RTS.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#204 - 2015-12-05 10:12:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Yes, CCP say your possible solution to having links far away on a huge grid by explaining that they will most likely work inside a small AOE. RIP skirmish gangs (apart from with t2 dessy pending details)

Not to mention that trying to have on-grid-boosts away from fleet not only makes a mockery of the whole concept for these changes but it will simply be too vulnerable to death squads of 3rd parties who can simply harass boosters 5000km away from he fight.

All the proposed changes and new ships have the potential to be an utter mess when combined together in anything but small scale fights. You argue for a deeper strategy, but i would suggest that what you will get is unpredictable uncertainty instead.


Skirmish gangs don't require links unless you're terrible.


This highligts your bias. It entirely depends on what you are fighting. Nano engagement envelope shrinks quite significantly without links so a blanket statement like this shows you have no interest in a conersation.

And a 30% boost is god mode? How can you prove your own notion incorrect in a single paragraph and not notice? And sure, if my friend just needs to fly alone to resolve one of the main (but purile) argument, that can be arranged lol.
Markus Lionum
EVE Corporation 98582134
#205 - 2015-12-05 11:10:07 UTC
Get over it link boy. You will have to learn to pvp properly or go mission it out in high sec
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#206 - 2015-12-05 11:19:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Markus Lionum wrote:
Get over it link boy. You will have to learn to pvp properly or go mission it out in high sec


From the guy with 100 kills in over half a decade lol.

There really should be a filter on this forum that checks people actually pvp before they are allowed to comment on pvp lol. The number of non-forum alts with strong opinions on pvp with no combat record is astounding.

In reality, what i will have to do is just blob up to fight blobs since taking other options away leaves less choice for engagement styles.
Andre Vauban
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#207 - 2015-12-05 15:05:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Andre Vauban
Yuri Antollare wrote:
Andre Vauban wrote:
Wow, what a thread. OGB are a horribly abused mechanic, however moving them on-grid is not a fix. All this will do is encourage the larger side in fleet fights and raise the bar to fighting to "if I cannot alpha a linked, boosted, CS off the field, I cannot fight". If one side doesn't meet this criteria, there will be no fights because this means the side that can alpha a CS (the more powerful side) gets to use links while the other side does not. This tips the balance of power even more towards the larger fleet.

What we have today is FAR better as the barrier to entry to get a cloaky T3 booster is fairly low. If CCP doesn't like the way links work, they should just flat out delete them from the game. Moving them on-grid with no other changes is a knee-jerk reaction that is actually worse than what we have now.



Links on grid is just one change amongst a larger effort to reshape pvp on the grid, viewing it in isolation is misleading. For example, links are on grid but the new grid is ******* huge, I don't see any reason why your CS has to be fit in the style of "hah im a brick" and sit @ 0. Probing changes, grid size, AOE MJD and other new AOE weapons inbound, links on grid etc. are all part of a goal to bring more relevance to the grid in a tactical sense.

What we currently have is sit boosts off grid or on station, anchor up, F1. What we will have is more options and more tactical depth, do you want to brawl in heavy armor, sacrificing relative grid mobility and likely having to settle for a damnation sitting with the fleet? Or do you want to take a ranged shield fleet with a nano Nighthawk? Perhaps you will go with quick aligning/always aligned booster sat @ 7,000km off the fight with a couple of anti-tackle ships in support? Perhaps you will go with two aligned boosters @ 7,000km in seperate groups. Perhaps you decide to add redundancy to your fleet and have less obvious ships running gang links spread through out the fleet.

Sounds like more choice, more tactical depth, more relevance of your entire fleets positioning and more engaging gameplay, perfect counters to Anchored Blob N+1. We might even reach the point where a real person makes a better booster/command ship driver than an alt.





Sigh, but this "strategy" is exactly my point. The more powerful side will have the ability to counter all these strategies and kill the weaker sides links. This will in turn make them even stronger. This is the opposite of asymmetrical warfare that CCP needs to get back to (ie see logi nerfs so the losing side can actually kill something before losing their entire fleet). This is why I'm a fan of taking the strategy of either let the little guy use links like the big guys or just delete them all together. Link strategies that favor only the more powerful guy using links are flawed.

The argument everybody has is "It's not fair to the little guy (ie solo pvper w/o links) to fight the big guy (ie solo pvper w/ links)". This is valid, however the solution is not to change it so the little guy has a HARDER time getting links themselves. The solution is to make it easier for the little guy to even the field. On grid links make it harder for the little guy. Deleting links entirely from the game make it easier for the little guy.

.
Markus Lionum
EVE Corporation 98582134
#208 - 2015-12-05 21:07:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Markus Lionum
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Markus Lionum wrote:
Get over it link boy. You will have to learn to pvp properly or go mission it out in high sec


From the guy with 100 kills in over half a decade lol.

There really should be a filter on this forum that checks people actually pvp before they are allowed to comment on pvp lol. The number of non-forum alts with strong opinions on pvp with no combat record is astounding.

In reality, what i will have to do is just blob up to fight blobs since taking other options away leaves less choice for engagement styles.



Your tears are sweet. But you will man up and blob in return so is all good

Frigate pvp for sport in FW is a BIG part of what lure people to remain in the game. Facing a min/max frigate, with drugs, implants and links as a nublet or even vetaran, when all you want is some fun is a bad business model. Frig pvp is is what 99% of people start with when they dip into pvp

Its frigate pvp you scrub stop linking you are so bad.

You sir are more risk adverse than a fresh starting pvp'er that pays for his ships / account with his RL food money, should stop preaching to people about what pvp is about
Samwise Everquest
Plus 10 NV
#209 - 2015-12-05 21:55:04 UTC
I love watching these beta males cry about their precious ogb :)

Pras Phil.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#210 - 2015-12-06 01:24:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Samwise Everquest wrote:
I love watching these beta males cry about their precious ogb :)


As i and others have said many times. Putting boosts on grid is a mistake. Deleting boosts is a far better alternative to putting them on grid. Short of an unannounced and extensive rebalance of all related modules most boots apart from damnation (and even then) are just not that good on grid in many scenarios.

In trying to make a more dynamic arena, you end up with both fleets hoping their first shot will cripple the hostile fleet. Whoever loses their single boost ship looses the entire fight, at least on paper.

Markus Lionum wrote:
Your tears are sweet. But you will man up and blob in return so is all good

Frigate pvp for sport in FW is a BIG part of what lure people to remain in the game. Facing a min/max frigate, with drugs, implants and links as a nublet or even vetaran, when all you want is some fun is a bad business model. Frig pvp is is what 99% of people start with when they dip into pvp

Its frigate pvp you scrub stop linking you are so bad.

You sir are more risk adverse than a fresh starting pvp'er that pays for his ships / account with his RL food money, should stop preaching to people about what pvp is about


Sorry to break this to you. But the pvp in eve isnt that good. Its the interaction between players that retains players, not fair 1v1s.
Demerius Xenocratus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#211 - 2015-12-06 23:34:30 UTC
Estella Osoka wrote:
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:
Burtakus wrote:
I still remember when I was a noon and when I was getting better without links and when I was finally decent without links.

The one thing that kept me in the game was joining a player Corp in FW. I am a 20p8 player that took a 4 year break because I never got engaged with the player base beyond getting dunked because I had no clue what I was doing.

I will readily admit that the SP gap between new and older payers can be and is a big turn off. There is a reason my newer alt does not do much beyond probe and train skills. With that being said, the SP gap is not in my opinion the biggest gap. The biggest gap is the skill aspect in the pilot themselves. There is a steep learning curve to transitioning from scrub level noob to decent pilot. The faster you progress that the easier and more enjoyable the game becomes. The only way to accelerate that learning curve is to get engaged with the player base and go fly with reckless abandon. No amount of off grid vs on grid vs with vs without links will change that ever.

The game needs a player driven solution to attract and retain newer players while they progress the learning curve. Until that improves nothing will change except the gap between new and old players.


The SP gap was less of a turn off than finding out I needed to buy a second account to be competitive.


The SP gap is a myth. If you train a ship to mastery 5, and you are facing an opponent with similar ship, then you are both on an equal footing barring how you fit, how you fly, drugs, implants, and possible OBG.

The OBG can be mitigated by making sure there are none on dscan.


It takes several months to reach an acceptable skill level for a single frigate, assuming this "new player" has a perfectly focused skill plan and a "friend" feeding him ISK. I have been playing for two years now and I still don't have every frigate relevant skill maxed because, SHOCKER, as a first time player on my first character there were/are other things I need to train in order to participate more fully in the game.

Bittervets with multiple high SP accounts seem to forget what it was like to start with nothing. Especially in a 10 year old game against people who've been training multiple characters for the duration.
Demerius Xenocratus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#212 - 2015-12-06 23:50:10 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Yes, CCP say your possible solution to having links far away on a huge grid by explaining that they will most likely work inside a small AOE. RIP skirmish gangs (apart from with t2 dessy pending details)

Not to mention that trying to have on-grid-boosts away from fleet not only makes a mockery of the whole concept for these changes but it will simply be too vulnerable to death squads of 3rd parties who can simply harass boosters 5000km away from he fight.

All the proposed changes and new ships have the potential to be an utter mess when combined together in anything but small scale fights. You argue for a deeper strategy, but i would suggest that what you will get is unpredictable uncertainty instead.


Skirmish gangs don't require links unless you're terrible.


This highligts your bias. It entirely depends on what you are fighting. Nano engagement envelope shrinks quite significantly without links so a blanket statement like this shows you have no interest in a conersation.

And a 30% boost is god mode? How can you prove your own notion incorrect in a single paragraph and not notice? And sure, if my friend just needs to fly alone to resolve one of the main (but purile) argument, that can be arranged lol.


As I said, when your friend flies alone while you're sleeping I'll take note.

A 30% boost to most of the critical stats on your ship is pretty close to god mode, yes. It's like you think I don't actually live in the FW zone and see this **** on a daily basis. Nano kiting should require skill. It should not be a case of "I have links they don't" as you engage and tackle from 60k doing 11k in a frigate or 6k in a cruiser. You shouldn't be able to stay on field against everything. Paying a second sub should not be the turning point between having to exercise skill and discretion in target selection and piloting, and just being able to remain ongrid and permanently harass the enemy because they don't have links. It is absolutely nuts that CCP let it get to the point where the possession of links was the deciding factor in a major portion of PvP encounters and I am grateful that they are finally doing something about it.

If you cannot kite with a 54k point / 60k engagement range in a frigate doing 7k m/s cold, perhaps you should take up ice mining in highsec. You are not entitled to be a solo god because you pay CCP more money than someone else.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#213 - 2015-12-07 00:04:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
How do you know if im sleeping? That seems an awfully intrusive standard to balance a game with.

Any proviso in a discussion about game balance that has 'Your friend must play while you are sleeping' in it, is already so convoluted and unwieldy as to be hilariously broken.

Personally, it doesnt matter to me if someone has alts. I tend to not fixate on individual players game choices. I just see the pixels in space and deal with them the best i can.

And a 30% boost is actually just a 30% boost. God mode is something much different. If you want to use extreme rhetoric to inflate the problem and express how upset boosts make you, then feel free. But it doesnt help your case.

Boosts are very powerful if used correctly. They can also be meaningless when used with no thought. They can also be expensive losses if used carelessly or without attention.

Luckily, i have a friend who flies off grid links for me so some of your major arguments are mute in my case.
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome
#214 - 2015-12-07 00:34:55 UTC
Andre Vauban wrote:
Wow, what a thread. OGB are a horribly abused mechanic, however moving them on-grid is not a fix. All this will do is encourage the larger side in fleet fights and raise the bar to fighting to "if I cannot alpha a linked, boosted, CS off the field, I cannot fight". If one side doesn't meet this criteria, there will be no fights because this means the side that can alpha a CS (the more powerful side) gets to use links while the other side does not. This tips the balance of power even more towards the larger fleet.

What we have today is FAR better as the barrier to entry to get a cloaky T3 booster is fairly low. If CCP doesn't like the way links work, they should just flat out delete them from the game. Moving them on-grid with no other changes is a knee-jerk reaction that is actually worse than what we have now.


^^

This is spot on.

https://soundcloud.com/ibanezlaney
Demerius Xenocratus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#215 - 2015-12-07 04:20:40 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
How do you know if im sleeping? That seems an awfully intrusive standard to balance a game with.

Any proviso in a discussion about game balance that has 'Your friend must play while you are sleeping' in it, is already so convoluted and unwieldy as to be hilariously broken.

Personally, it doesnt matter to me if someone has alts. I tend to not fixate on individual players game choices. I just see the pixels in space and deal with them the best i can.

And a 30% boost is actually just a 30% boost. God mode is something much different. If you want to use extreme rhetoric to inflate the problem and express how upset boosts make you, then feel free. But it doesnt help your case.

Boosts are very powerful if used correctly. They can also be meaningless when used with no thought. They can also be expensive losses if used carelessly or without attention.

Luckily, i have a friend who flies off grid links for me so some of your major arguments are mute in my case.


Why do you keep repeating something we all know is untrue? If it was actually another human being controlling your links I would not have a problem with it. But we all know that is not the case. It's a self-evident fact that OGB functions are performed by semi-AFK alts.

Anything in the game can be ineffective if used improperly. For discussing matters of balance and risk/reward we prefer to look at how a mechanic impacts gameplay when utilized in conjunction with an above-room-temperature IQ.
Markus Lionum
EVE Corporation 98582134
#216 - 2015-12-07 05:03:50 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:


Luckily, i have a friend who flies off grid links for me so some of your major arguments are mute in my case.


Bullshit lol
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#217 - 2015-12-07 05:15:14 UTC
Prove me wrong. Seems like a large part of the anti-ogb argument revolves around paranoia and distrust :p
Markus Lionum
EVE Corporation 98582134
#218 - 2015-12-07 05:32:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Markus Lionum
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Prove me wrong. Seems like a large part of the anti-ogb argument revolves around paranoia and distrust :p



yeah I got it you were trolling all along, the tears are still salty and well preserved tho
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#219 - 2015-12-07 05:33:53 UTC
Pointing out the absurdity in an argument isnt actually trolling.
Markus Lionum
EVE Corporation 98582134
#220 - 2015-12-07 05:40:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Markus Lionum
500mn officer t3 with 3xlinks will be possible for under 1,5b I dont see the big problem about links.

What you are complaining about are specific details, crashing plexes with your t1 faction/pirate frigate wich is ghei since its frigate pvp, but calling it ghei its just my oppinion and maybe another 90% of people involved in that kind of pvp


Also your mention of paranoia and distrust is just you scraping out the bottom of your argument barrel and is a dirty tactic