Player Features and Ideas Discussion

So then shouldn't the solution be to nerf the number of links a ship can have active? Either by introducing a hard cap, increasing the fitting costs of the boosting modules, by nerfing the fitting of the command ships themselves (worst solution), or even to make it so you can only have 2 links of the same category active at a time.



I wish there was a boost for neut range. But I would be in favor of nerfing the boosts effectiveness and buff the modules themselves. Mainly because if you think about it, most skills in the game increase attributes of your ship by 5% per level. This would mean that the ~25-30% (And one of the EWAR ones is 50%) bonuses you get from each link is equivalent to 5-6 trained levels. So if you look at it under that context it seems kinda weird that just by running boosts, you can turn your brand new character into a perfect character in the respected areas that the boosts work on.

As an example, a perfect Harpy pilot without boosts and no mods has 5234 EHP with a resist profile of 20-84-76-60.
A Harpy pilot with 0 skills and every perfect boost running and no mods has 5504 EHP with a resist profile of 28.8-85.8-78.7-64.4.

Now granted, you cannot have a 0 skill pilot flying a ship, but that just means the difference is even greater in favor of the boosted, unskilled pilot. This isn't true for all the skills, just from messing with EFT to provide those number for a few minutes I did notice that scan resolution, align time and speed under a prop mod would require some skill from the unskilled pilot to reach the break even point. With that said, if someone else feels compelled to find the breakeven point, have fun.

So really, we could create an easy solution that would require little server overhead by simply nerfing the boost strength, or if people wanted to take a hit on server performance but have a more elegant solution of evening the playing field...

What if boosts were redesigned so that instead of giving a set bonus to the ships themselves, it would affect the player skills instead. By this I mean if we can only train up to level 5 skills, there would be 2 additional hidden skills that were untrainable, however could be boosted to level 7. Then boosts could give say a max of 3 or 4 hidden skills. This is an extremely rough idea and have not given a whole lot of thought to the actual numbers itself, so the numbers are just placeholders in this post. Making these additional checks would not help the servers under TiDi, but its up to the you guys if you think you could live with it.

Yes and no. People have fits like 100 MN Afterburners or fit ECCM to make it more difficult to scan down (A 6 link booster can still reach the probe cap). With that said, you are correct, running even a 5 link setup opens up ALOT of fitting capabilities on a command ship.

How about no compromise. That's one of the problems with society in general today. Some comes up w/ a bad idea and we (the big we) feel obligated to compromise. This creates a general creep towards bad ideas in small compromising steps. Off grid boosts are bad, so they need to go. The only compromise should be to how soon.

Don't get me wrong, I've had some good times in wh space taking out full link boats with zero tank. They tend to orbit POS just outside the shields, but on a tabbed out screen. If you can get 4 bombers on them you can pretty much 2 volley them and warp out before the POS can get a lock on you. It's a good exercise to get new players on board with doing hit and run stuff at an enemy POS.

The whole thing is just not in line w/ the risk/reward mindset of this game.

TL/DR: Don't compromise with bad.

This is kind of off topic, but is addressing a comment in the thread.


A DPS 'stacking penalty' is THE MOST absurd idea I've read on these forums in 10 years.

I'll take something that I can shoot at over something I can't any day.

Keep predicting that... I will keep using my Claymore (with Mindlink) on grid, playing an active role in the fleet, and having fun.

Once the ability to boost while off grid goes away, than people will be forced to get on grid, or suffer against those who do use them on grid. People will have to adapt. Some may well start bringing a Falcon alt to every fight, others will bring more DPS, others will bring an extra Logistics ship, others will bring the Command Ship on grid. Those who adapt will win, those who do not, will not.

Most combat in Eve consists of taking advantage of an opponent's mistake, or fooling someone into engaging you at a point when it is advantageous to you, but they do not see it. Fights are rarely fair. This is true at all scales of combat.

At B-R, both sides thought they could win, or at least have a tactical stalemate. One side was drastically wrong.

At Asakai, one side jumped instead of bridging. The other side took advantage of that fact.

In a small gang fight, it is no different. The "solo" Orthrus pilot hopes that a home defense gang will chase him and try to catch him. He will use his superior mobility to avoid anything that can kill him, while stringing along tacklers, and picking them off one by one. Once his opponent simply locks down a gate, or brings a hard counter, the "solo" Orthrus will typically bounce safe spots until he can log off. He's not stupid enough to YOLO into a hard counter (multiple Interceptors working together, a Lachesis, a Huginn, and Onyx, etc).

I've made whole gangs run away or log off simply by dropping combat probes to find the off-grid booster. Once they realize that I can find the OGB, they tend to avoid further "fights."

Other small gang pilots will go out in a relatively cheap ships, such as destroyers, Vexors, or Caracals, knowing that they will die, but that they win the ISK war if they take a single T2 ship with them. We had this happen to us the other day, where we traded a very nice Lachesis for about 15 T1-fitted destroyers. It was a bad trade for us...

Other times that "AFK ratter" has a cyno fitted, or a gang waiting one gate away, or docked in the station. Or whatever...

Other times, a gang does not understand the implications of new technology. While I was at work the other day, some of my friends encountered a pair of Bifrosts for the first time. My friends undocked an Armageddon and a few other ships and basically dared the opposing gang to come within fifty kilometers. The opponents quickly used their dual Bifrosts to pull the Armageddon off the station and slaughter it, while everyone else sat helplessly and watched...

Bringing links on grid simply makes it more readily apparent whether one side has a hidden advantage. Will this result in less PVP? I do not think so. I suppose that some of the groups out there may continue to avoid fights because of whatever reason. Here are some of my favorite examples from the last two weeks (I paraphrase local chat):

"You all brought too many pilots to respond to our gang."
"WTF! You have two Logistics ships! We won't fight you."
"OMG! You have a Curse and a Rook! We won't fight you."
"Wow, you can probe down my links alt. I guess I'll log now."
"It only took five of you to tackle me and kill my Orthrus. What a bunch of dirty blobbers. I guess I won't come back here again."

These types will always find an excuse to avoid a fight. The rest of us will continue to try to take advantage of opponents' mistakes, or force our opponents into fighting us through trickery, or hitting something they have to defend.

Of course, the basic mistake here is using FLEET boosters to enhance SOLO play. You so badass you're a one-man fleet? Didn't think so. If there's two of you, don't call it solo. At which point, grab a command destroyer if you *must* boost.

So how does one person who likes to spend time doing solo stuff, as its much much easier to organize then fleet stuff, have any means to defend themselves other then run? Even with links, odds are 2 people (with leadership boosts) vs 1 person with off grid links is still going to lose that fight. That one person might have just enough to kill 1 of the 2 making it at least interesting to see how this 2v1 scenario is going to look like AND STAY FOR THE FIGHT. Off grid boosts gives a home town advantage. Most small fleets wont bother with boosts cause they want to remain mobile. But if you happen to get ganked in a 1v1 situation, where they won and had links, I'd say home system advantage, careful when treading though someone else back yard, trespassers will be shot.

And this is counterable! Combat Probes, use them. Add it to your small fleet composition. I can assure you the site of Combat Probes is enough to dock up/cloak up/POS up and by by links. And if its an AFK booster, you just got yourself (and gang) a nice juicy kill! And with a nice POD with implants as well maybe.

And even without Off Grid Boosts, all it takes in a 1v1 situation is to have the one dude have a better ship. If your hunting, and choosing your targets, odds are your stronger then them anyway and you win. Why not nurf better ships?

And that's where I will agree. ECCmed and its nearly anti probable fit should be tweaked so it cant. If its uncloaked, it should be probable. Fitting a cloak is fine, that turns off links. And all it takes are some afk combat probs to be on Dscan somewhere for an afk booster to think twice about uncloaking.

Command Boosts are an a neat idea, unique in the gaming word for the most part, and their place in Eve is part of the complex dynamics that make Eve Eve. If we start gutting Eve of its complexity and in depth strategy then we are going to be left with a basic attrition war game. Who's fleet is bigger, who's got a better tank/gank ratio will be the victors. What makes Eve great is how well it mirrors our history of war and the tactics with the evolution of technology. Eve is really Intelligence vs Intelligence. Can I take that fight or should I yield. If I have to yield, how can I counter that. And just as long as there is a counter, then its not OP. Now if it comes down to it, and that counter is 'too much effort' a balance needs to be adopted to better the fun of playing the game. And right now, my method to balance Boosts I think addressees that.