Player Features and Ideas Discussion

This is a thread about Command Ships and the application of bonuses.

Change 1;

Swap the Bonuses on T3s and CS's, command ships now give a 5% bonus, and T3s a 3%.

Change 2;

When off grid, all bonuses are reduced in effectiveness by (insert balanced percentage reduction here eg 50%).

Change 3; (to help balance)

T3 skill bonus, 5% increase in off grid effectiveness per level. (this means if being off grid reduced the bonus effectiveness by a base 50%, a T3 with lvl 5 in the correct subsystem skill would have that penalty reduced to 25% giving the bonuses 75% of there effectiveness while off grid)

This change would mean;
An on grid Command ship is the most effective means of boosting a fleet.
A T3 booster will be more effective off grid than a command ship is off grid, assuming the LVL5 sub skill.

This means both have a role, this makes neither redundant, that means more diversity, and more tactics, both of these things are good.

Please flame/ give valid opinions.

Supported tbh, this was an attempt to find a mid ground, so both parties are happy and so both T3s and CS's have a role.

I actually do miss the fun times of zipping around the battlefield in a claymore shooting and boosting

Leave T3 bonus as is, and make Command Ships work only on grid, or if you really want your pos hiding bitches, add anchorable modules to your pos that do the same damn thing.

T3's made Command ships redundant. No point in flying them when you can get an off grid T3 with 3 links.

It should be the other way round 5% on CS and 3% on T3's given that the training time involved is much greater for Command Ships.

It's a no brainer.

Fully supported also, if not because the skill train is longer the extra logistics/heavy assaults skill should have some input towards the percentage bonus increase. As for being on grid, does the extension of grid still work?

I agree to some extent - and I have Command Ships 5 and can't fly T3.

You'd expect me to say "nerf T3" right?

Wrong.

I think the command link bonuses are fine as they are.

The T3 ships running links are usually pretty fragile in the scheme of things. They can boost but that's it, you're not going to see them fight on-grid.

Now I realise this brings in the whole "boosts only work on-grid" argument but I don't believe that would work well - I think it would always benefit the static booster, by which I mean the "home system" booster. Also I have no confidence the bonuses would apply to all of the fleet in time during bigger battles.

Preventing command links working within a forcefield shouldn't be beyond the wit of man though?

What existing command ships need is something more to bring to a small/medium roaming gang. Maybe DPS, maybe something else.

tl;dr buff the T2 rather than nerfing the T3

Change 1:

Yes. T3 are supposed to be about variety and not be better than T2 counterparts. While T3 can only fit 1 link, sometimes that's all you need. T3s should be more effective than field commands, but not more effective than fleet commands.

Change 2: How about a reduction by 100%. Want boosts? Get on grid. Removing a gang's boosts should be a tactical option (just as removing ewar, logis, and other support is)

Change 3. No. See above.

*Is surprised by the lack of troll, and prescence of reasonable argument and discussion*

Everything being said in this topic seems to suggest people want there command ships to be valid again, maybe if we keep it going for long enough the all mighty CCP might dain to respond :P

CS have the DPS option already - Absolution/Sleipnir/Astarte/Nighthawk

The T3 still be well defended by way of lower sig, similar resists, and still fit 3 links. I wouldn't use "fragile" to describe them!

It's just plain wrong that to fly a CS you need more pre-reqs than a T3 and you can't do a better job.

Although I do agree that CS off grid is kinda stupid, they should make links only work on grid... not sure on how difficult technically that is for CCP to do.