These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The Problem With Entirely Removing Off-Grid Links

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#161 - 2015-12-28 18:02:14 UTC
Estella Osoka wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Bobman Smith wrote:

What on grid links? I've never seen them before. But your right. Maybe that solution is a bit counterproductive. OGB should be scanable without perfect skills, and they should get weapons/suspect timers and the likes to whomever they are buffing to make them stick out more.



You've never seen them because there's absolutely no good reason to use on grid links.

That will change when off-grid links are removed.

So there's really no need to contemplate "balancing" offgrid links.


Are you really linking a 2 year old post? Still haven't seen a dev blog article yet, just the twitter feed people keep referring to as gospel.

I'll believe this is coming when I see it for testing on SISI. Till then, I guess it will be another 2 years before they are brought on-grid.


Find any comment by a dev, ever, suggesting that they would keep OGB in the absence of the technical hurdle that allowed it to survive this long. Just one.

You seem to be stuck in the "denial" phase of grief. Lol

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#162 - 2015-12-28 18:13:00 UTC
Hopelesshobo wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:


Let's just say poorly for the supporter of those arguments.

Lol


And it was also poorly balanced because it gave the same 5 fighters or bombers to all ships. It didn't scale at all. It would have been much better if CCP would have introduced a module that could have been fit to the ships that allowed fighters to be assisted. Then a frigate could have been limited to say 1, while a battleship could have had a full flight.

.


It was much easier and made much more sense to just tell everyone to just bring their damn carrier on grid like everyone* else involved in the fight.

* The booster is obviously the the exception until they change this.

At the end of the day, it should be made easy to undestand for everyone. You have an influence on the fight currently happening ---> you must be on grid.
ISD Max Trix
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#163 - 2015-12-30 02:29:52 UTC
Quote:
2. Be respectful toward others at all times.

The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.

4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not conductive to the community spirit that CCP promotes. As such, this kind of behavior will not be tolerated.



I have removed some post and edited others for the above reasons. The post that where edited, where edited and not removed because they contributed to the discussion and where within the rules (with the exception of quoting the removed post.)

ISD Max Trix

Lieutenant

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

I do not respond to EVE mails about forum moderation.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#164 - 2015-12-30 08:52:40 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
The Primary Target wrote:
The problem with removing off-grid links entirely is that it will asymmetrically penalize small gang and solo pvpers.


Quote:
I know many are of the opinion the only truly solo pvp is without links



So this thing you like to do where you're all, "Look, I know $word has a well-known, commonly accepted definition, but I choose to use this other definition that is actually in complete opposition with the commonly accepted definition, instead..."

Is anyone ever impressed by that?

Do you think one single person ever reads that, nods at your sage wisdom and says, "You know, at first I thought you were being ridiculous, but now that you've shown me that words can mean whatever is convenient at their time of use, I must admit, I am persuaded, sir!"

And the patronizing acknowledgment that some people are of the opinion that the true meaning of the word is expressed by its actual definition. Roll



There is no actual definition there, because solo means a single person by the dictionary. If you have 2 chars you are still a single person. That means the whole definition shenaningans is invalid, we are talking about a virtual reality (a.k.a a agame) where the concepts do not mimic real world).

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#165 - 2015-12-30 08:55:40 UTC
Max Deveron wrote:
Seriously, with 7,800 km of grid space there is absolutely no reason to keep/allow off grid boosting.

The booster could still be on grid and.....
1.) still require probes
2.) a cloaky to get close for warp in
3.) a really fast interceptor to provide a warp in.

With the larger grids now....
1.) a fleet could keep an eye on their booster and warp help to it at a moments notice.
2.) the booster...even as an alt would see most trouble coming its way and start burning for safety or warp to it his damn self to protect the booster.

So what is the issue again? Why do we need OGB?
Hell at this point i would not mind all boosting to be on grid....that includes orcas and rorqs.



7800 km grid means nothing, really probes will pin point you in exactly 10 seconds...


Offgrid boost gone, great, but now They should possibly revisit some of the old nerfs they made to the boosts. I woudl say command ships bonuses should become a bit higher now, sicne they are much less mobile than for example the command destroyers and therefore MUCH more vulnerable.

On my eyes, unless you increase Commadn ships bonus to something like 5% per level you are never going to see them, but only CD.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Shova'k
The Bank Of Jita
#166 - 2015-12-30 21:08:27 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:



7800 km grid means nothing, really probes will pin point you in exactly 10 seconds...


Offgrid boost gone, great, but now They should possibly revisit some of the old nerfs they made to the boosts. I woudl say command ships bonuses should become a bit higher now, sicne they are much less mobile than for example the command destroyers and therefore MUCH more vulnerable.

On my eyes, unless you increase Commadn ships bonus to something like 5% per level you are never going to see them, but only CD.



only the command ships that are lacking in the super tank department are much more vulnerable. the damnation for example is easy to get the EHP in the 300,000 to 500,000 range depending on fit/implants and if your boosting skills are maxed/mindlink ect.. used to get higher maxed with slaves but the nerfs to links and the damnation lost some power grid. pretty sure EOS gets a decent tank as well as the vulture the claymore/sleip varients have to rely more on active boosting so they can sadly be alpha'd off the field rather easy if u catch them at the right angle.

still agree the command ships should have been bumped to 5% from the get go when they rebalanced tech 3's to not over shadow command ships. personally i never used a booster off grid in pvp ever cant ever see a reason to i can give the same boosts on grid as off grid (assuming im only doing 3 racial links) and some one else can provide the others since i can sit all the way in fleet command and rest can fill spots bellow, and im talking back when tech 3 still had 5% i still prefered a command on grid and so did the FC's of the fleets i was running with. personally only time i ever used boosts off grid was for PVE like incursions or wormhole sites.
Valacus
Streets of Fire
#167 - 2015-12-31 03:49:20 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Max Deveron wrote:
Seriously, with 7,800 km of grid space there is absolutely no reason to keep/allow off grid boosting.

The booster could still be on grid and.....
1.) still require probes
2.) a cloaky to get close for warp in
3.) a really fast interceptor to provide a warp in.

With the larger grids now....
1.) a fleet could keep an eye on their booster and warp help to it at a moments notice.
2.) the booster...even as an alt would see most trouble coming its way and start burning for safety or warp to it his damn self to protect the booster.

So what is the issue again? Why do we need OGB?
Hell at this point i would not mind all boosting to be on grid....that includes orcas and rorqs.



7800 km grid means nothing, really probes will pin point you in exactly 10 seconds...


Offgrid boost gone, great, but now They should possibly revisit some of the old nerfs they made to the boosts. I woudl say command ships bonuses should become a bit higher now, sicne they are much less mobile than for example the command destroyers and therefore MUCH more vulnerable.

On my eyes, unless you increase Commadn ships bonus to something like 5% per level you are never going to see them, but only CD.


Uh, no. It's your job to defend your own links. That's why they're being forced on grid. You have to defend them now, not just spam D-Scan until you see probes and click warp. You're going to have to pull your guns out and shoot at something, or jam something, or web something, or do anything other than cloak and find another safe.