Player Features and Ideas Discussion

There is no need to take in the High sec situation.. i agree with you on that

its more 0.0 and Low sec
as most know an Rorqual has a bigger boost then a Orca
and with an Orca beeing a Whale ...
its not as fast off grid incomparison to a normal Command ship or T3

unless the boost and/or there survival is changed i think they need to stay with there off-grid boosting possibilty



i support the rest of the proposal ....altough i'm not sure how much of a game changer the current boost levels are
might it be an option to Increase the boost with 50% for beein ONgrid... instead of a penelty for beeing off grid ???

only somebody who has no idea of how grids work in EVE could propose such an idea.

Instead of describing your problem as accurately as possible (I guess it would be sth along the lines of "the command ship should be more vulnerable when applying boosts") and letting the developers come up with a solution you are proposing a (flawed) solution.

(and when CCP implements your "solution" you'll probably be the first one to complain "but I was only 10km off my fleetmates, why didn't they get any bonuses???"
or "we were 1000km off the POS and couldn't even see the ships 300km away from us that were in line with the tower - how the **** did they get bonuses from their claymore inside POS shields???")

Anyways... maybe studying this guide will change your mind: http://go-dl.eve-files.com/media/0905/gridfumanual2%5B2%5D.pdf

Your proposed "solution" would usher in a new era of grid-fu and probably solve none of the problems you want to solve.

The typical eve player says "grid" to mean things "close" to you as they lack another appropriate term. Given the strangeness of the way grids can load, I'd say "grid" only is not the best way to do it, however, making it somehow ranged based seems a very nice solution.

You are way too lenient. The whole idea of making them on-grid is that no ship should be able to influence much of anything without getting involved.
The concept of reduced effectiveness off-grid should therefore be much harsher, your 'compromise' is not much at all as it will essentially allow T3's to do exactly what they do now with negligible reduction .. majority will likely opt for the nigh invulnerable +20% enhancer rather than the exposed +30% enhancer (haven't done math, but should be ballpark).

On-grid only, with:
Enhanced tanking for Fleet CC's, perfect option would be logi based (ie. +% to incoming RR), but buffer is probably an easier sell
Increase link allowance for T3 sub-system to two (from one) and add a tank bonus as well, includes lowering sig, increasing speed or any other damage mitigation.
Remove link limit on T1 BCs .. with no efficiency bonus and at 50CPU/200Grid per link the balance is built in

PS: I too have compromised, my original solution was to require a link-ship to chose which ships it wanted to boost by locking them up .. would put it in-line with eWar/Logi and other force multipliers .. but seeing the response the first threads got it was pretty obvious that Eve is not yet ready for something that extreme

Edit: How fast is it to extend/mold the grid. Is it something that can be done at the drop of a hat (ie. offensively) or does it take time/manpower (ie. defensively)?
If the former, then yes a maximum limit to range is probably needed, if on the other the latter applies then on-grid is just well as it allows for a slight defensive advantage .. digging trenches as it were.

Thank you very much good sir.

Rothgar a Dev/GM? Hmmmm .. explains a few things .. hahahaha

Was just a matter of time before it was moved considering the content/topic, surprised it took as long as it did.

In my opinion being able to off-grid boost at 75% effectiveness is too high. There needs to be a strong incentive to be on grid. It should be 50% at most.

It's worth fiddling with CS and the gang links themselves, too. Such as giving all fleet CS a resist bonus (like HICs) to increase their survivability and RR-ability in fleet situations, encouraging field CS to fit links by giving them a bonus to reduce the CPU/PG requirements of links, and having a good look at the balance of the links themselves (very powerful skirmish links, kinda lol Information links).

I disagree that there is a problem, the issue of pos based / off grid boosters is annoying, but look at what theyre doing, and compare it to real war time scenario's pos based boosters is like an OPs room in a defended area, off grid boosters are like forward air controllers in the field, almost impossible to find, but very effective, i think removing the boosts due to them not being on grid is rediculous in this universe, same system boosting is a given. And to push it forward i think there should be a way of boosting for a set distance (ie 2ly's) deminishing as it gets further away, maybe a bit extreme but cant see it being to far beyond imagination.

As a long time command ship (and that includes command T3) pilot, I fully supported a no off grid ganglink bonus. Been wanting this a very long time. Incursions most of the time have a T3 link offgrid giving the bonuses without causing it to affect the reward for finishing the site. Pvp, when attacking, the defenders can have the ship sitting anywhere.

The one real big problem however will come into however the coding works for boosters since other ones are an in system. No idea how hard it would be to differentiate. The best flag I can think of to separate it out, would be if it had the same thing as however watch list works? It doesn't show health unless person is on grid, so there must be some sort of extra means of it working. Perhaps each grid is assigned an ID# in a system. Link bonus has that person's grid ID running a separate booster layer. To receive bonus, works like the in system y/n system. ID chain not there, then bonuses not there. New symbol, a yellow circle for if you are receiving system bonuses, but not grid bonus.