These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Command Bursts and the New World of Fleet Boosting

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Drago Misharie
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#321 - 2016-08-29 22:31:59 UTC
Daemun Khanid wrote:
Drago Misharie wrote:
It's going to take awhile for CCP to recover from the loss of Revenue. Very pro-pvp change but does not take into account that all the targets will be gone.

Not saying that it's a bad change for players but it is an incredibly terrible change for CCP


1. Cancel four accounts
2. reprocess all industrial related ships and modules
3. Reprocess of all leadership and command skill related modules and ships
4. Extract usesless skill points
5. Sell all and buy plexes for remaining accounts


Extractors for all that sp cost $$. As do the plex that you use that isk for to plex your remaining accounts. They may lose money over time due to a reduction in multi-account usage for link alts but they'll get a boost of income for the extractors, they always have and will continue to make even better money off plex than account subs and some ppl like myself will continue to fly multiple accounts they'll just be combat piloting them. Not as easy as sitting afk at a safe obviously but possible.

And cancel 4 accounts? Who's running 4 link alts and why is that a mining thing?



Somebody already answer your question in this forum, most worthwhile belts require minors to spread out which will not be within boost range and therefore decrease the value of having and Mining character
Lord Mudeki
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#322 - 2016-08-29 22:42:56 UTC
Damocles Orindus wrote:
Daemun Khanid wrote:
Just put links on-grid and get rid of the need to assign boosters and call it good. I have to agree. All this buff timer/range/skill rework stuff is just silliness imo.

No need for new modules, no need to make command processors into rigs, no need for silly ass ammo or scripts. Just give them a 500k/m max range. They try to warp at range to stay safe and a single interceptor ruins their day. Links are vulnerable, job done.


This ^^.

This entire list of changes is greatly unnecessary and would have been better implemented first by just moving combat boosts to on-grid and keeping mining boosts as is.



This^^
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#323 - 2016-08-29 22:45:16 UTC
Dunk Dinkle wrote:
Overall, it's a good plan to get ships providing boosts into the fight.

I do hope you reconsider how you are handling Wing Command and Fleet Command skills.

Fleet Command is a 12x skill and required months of training. For a slight range increase of bursts, it's not an equitable trade-off for the sunk skill points.

For those of us that have Wing Command and Fleet Command on our mains, not low SP link alts, I hope you consider an alternative plan on how to handle these skills in the transition.

Thanks!


The way I look at is this: why would I train from FC IV to FC V for a mere 4% more boost range. They need to adjust Fleet Command to 10-15% more range per level to make it really rewarding, without becoming mandatory.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Drago Misharie
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#324 - 2016-08-29 22:46:36 UTC
Maekchu wrote:
Was wondering about something, since I recall that Fozzie wrote that people will only get weapon timers and no suspect timers.

Let's say you have two corps at war in highsec. Since the boosts are quite strong (which is fine), I suppose people will use neutral boosting alts in order to boost their fleet when fighting war targets. Since the alt is most likely in an NPC corp, and does not seem to get a suspect timer when providing boost, this means you get a 99% safe booster, that is only vulnerable to suicide ganking (which realistically won't be dealt with).

Is this working as intended?

The easy fix is just to have people get suspect timers as logi does. I was just wondering, since it has been stated that people won't get suspect timers.



Excellent post
Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#325 - 2016-08-29 22:47:51 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Any consideration to allowing overheating for these modules? Could affect range, strength, duration, etc.

^ another way to reward skilled piloting; good idea.
Hong Hu
Roving Guns Inc.
Pandemic Legion
#326 - 2016-08-29 22:50:35 UTC
Clifffitir Awik wrote:
I dont get why you are changing a system of boosts that works quite well the way it is now. Not to mention industrial pilots have been saying NOPE to rorqs in belts forever. Way to take a page outta SOEs "how to kill a game" book.

Its not to late CCP. You can save yourselves from being the next SOE and eve being the next SWG. Listen to the people who actually use the system you are about to change.


Pity there's not a down-vote butan.
Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#327 - 2016-08-29 22:52:56 UTC
Golek Gaterau wrote:
Also if a boost can become a negative number when the boost ends needs further clarification (armor boost cycle ends in 5% armor of a given fleet memberd ship, what happens?).

I would suggest leaving the ship with either 1 HP in shield or armour depending on the type of command link used. Having ships explode because they lost the boost would be silly.

Also if a ship is on 1HP out of a maximum of let's say 10,000 HP for instance and it gets the command burst applied (for simplicity's sake let's say 20% increase in HP), then will it suddenly gain 2,000 HP?
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#328 - 2016-08-29 22:53:59 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
Dunk Dinkle wrote:
Overall, it's a good plan to get ships providing boosts into the fight.

I do hope you reconsider how you are handling Wing Command and Fleet Command skills.

Fleet Command is a 12x skill and required months of training. For a slight range increase of bursts, it's not an equitable trade-off for the sunk skill points.

For those of us that have Wing Command and Fleet Command on our mains, not low SP link alts, I hope you consider an alternative plan on how to handle these skills in the transition.

Thanks!


The way I look at is this: why would I train from FC IV to FC V for a mere 4% more boost range. They need to adjust Fleet Command to 10-15% more range per level to make it really rewarding, without becoming mandatory.


I generally believe in diminishing returns, so the 6%, 5%, 4% seem reasonable modifiers for Leadership, Wing Command, and Fleet Command.

However, a 14x skill providing a marginal increase in area of effect seems rather..... weak.
Fleet command is currently important because each level allows you to transfer boosts to an entire extra wing of pilots. I don't foresee the extra 4% range nearly as valuable.
Geogeno
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#329 - 2016-08-29 22:56:46 UTC
It's just embarrassing that is thought in almost all changes only to the PVP fraction. But what do the PVP Fighter if they get no ships or equipment. I would say suck on your finger and look stupid out of the laundry. The miners will be taken everything and get horny the PVP everything so it makes no sense, this game what else I find very well continue to play. I think I speak because many people from the soul. CCP can turn off in my opinion the same server when they do something like this new Mining Boost things.OopsOopsOops
Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#330 - 2016-08-29 22:57:00 UTC
Maekchu wrote:
Was wondering about something, since I recall that Fozzie wrote that people will only get weapon timers and no suspect timers.

Let's say you have two corps at war in highsec. Since the boosts are quite strong (which is fine), I suppose people will use neutral boosting alts in order to boost their fleet when fighting war targets. Since the alt is most likely in an NPC corp, and does not seem to get a suspect timer when providing boost, this means you get a 99% safe booster, that is only vulnerable to suicide ganking (which realistically won't be dealt with).

Is this working as intended?

The easy fix is just to have people get suspect timers as logi does. I was just wondering, since it has been stated that people won't get suspect timers.

I am guessing this is to prevent Orca pilots getting suspect timers. Perhaps we could just exclude mining links from giving the suspect timer. It seems wrong for something that powerful to be protected by concord.
Pirokobo
Game.Theory
GameTheory
#331 - 2016-08-29 23:03:18 UTC
Question #1:

Will the Porpoise be using the Echelon hull?

Question #2:

Do you honestly expect anyone to use the Rorqual the way you are suggesting it be used?
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#332 - 2016-08-29 23:04:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Tau Cabalander
Moac Tor wrote:
Maekchu wrote:
Was wondering about something, since I recall that Fozzie wrote that people will only get weapon timers and no suspect timers.

Let's say you have two corps at war in highsec. Since the boosts are quite strong (which is fine), I suppose people will use neutral boosting alts in order to boost their fleet when fighting war targets. Since the alt is most likely in an NPC corp, and does not seem to get a suspect timer when providing boost, this means you get a 99% safe booster, that is only vulnerable to suicide ganking (which realistically won't be dealt with).

Is this working as intended?

The easy fix is just to have people get suspect timers as logi does. I was just wondering, since it has been stated that people won't get suspect timers.

I am guessing this is to prevent Orca pilots getting suspect timers. Perhaps we could just exclude mining links from giving the suspect timer. It seems wrong for something that powerful to be protected by concord.

You should never be allowed to get someone CONCORDOKKEN for a passive action.

Otherwise CCP would have to record the pilot that applied every boost ("ownership"). Simpler to not do that, and not have consequences to code for.

Are the boosts maintained on system change? That would also be "fun" with boost ownership.
Maekchu
Doomheim
#333 - 2016-08-29 23:09:19 UTC
Geogeno wrote:
But what do the PVP Fighter if they get no ships or equipment.

Then we would make miner alts and rejoice about the increased profits gained from mining, since all the miners/industrialists who have no idea about economy has left.

I never understood, how the part of the community that specialize in mining/industry does not understand opportunity cost or simple cost calculations, leaving many items with negative profit margins.

But alas, there will always be miners around, since some are not baddies and will learn to work with on-grid boosts.
Sylvia Kildare
Kinetic Fury
#334 - 2016-08-29 23:09:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Sylvia Kildare
Linus Gorp wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Airi Cho wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Something else that just occurred to me: Squads should be removed. You don't need them anymore after these changes and their removal would reduce a lot of clutter in the fleet. Instead of 5 Wings with 5 Squads each, you can just have the 5 wings with all people in it. That's enough room to organize a fleet and all the problems with missing squads, overcrowded squads or finding out in which squad you are while the entire list jumps around erratically due to newly joining members would be gone.


TBH it can still make sense for just warping e.g. logi or ewar

That can be done by wings as well.

Squads are must-have for organized bomb runs, among other things.


Maybe eliminate squads but remove the 5-wing limit, then. Add as many wings as you want to fleet (or within reason... 10? 20?), then you can use them like the old squads or you can use them like current wings, either way.

FC -> 1 to X WCs -> various wing members... make a logi wing, ewar wing, ceptor wing, DPS wing, etc. etc. or a wing for every 8-10 bombers in a bomber fleet.

And I'm assuming a WC (or SC) with no members underneath will still get boosts under this new system. That's gonna be nice.

edit: also, to people speculating that the new command burst specialist skill is new and will have to be trained from scratch... could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure they're just going to rename Warfare Link Specialist to that.

Warfare Link Specialist is the skill for using command processors in your midslots to increase your warfare links fit in the highslots, and since that's going away, being replaced by rigs to add more of the new ammo/script-loaded burst highslot modules.... then pretty clearly that skill will be reused for the new purpose.
Lord Mudeki
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#335 - 2016-08-29 23:10:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Lord Mudeki
Darek Castigatus wrote:
Daemun Khanid wrote:

It's not a question of being able to fly the ships but even if it were just because you had leadership V that doesn't mean you can fly a command ship. But more importantly someone who trained a skill that required no specific ship or module shouldn't be forced to fly a specific ship/module to get use out of a skill they trained without those restrictions. A person doesn't just train basic leadership skills so they can be a link pilot flying a t3 cruiser they train them so they can command small gangs and fleets and get bonuses no matter what ship they are flying. This change says "well, if you want to get anything out of the skills that you've already devoted time training then you will be a boost ship" or "you can pay us to extract your skills and you can put the sp towards something that you'll actually use."

If you can't figure out the analogy that's your intellectual deficiency and not my fault but I'll break it down for you anyway.
Player plays monthly fee which allows them to train a skill.
(Consumer buys a guy that drives just fine and runs on gas like any other)

After making your purchase CCP says sorry but that skill doesn't do that any more.
(Consumer is told they can't buy gas anymore)

CCP says BUT if you fly fleet boost focused ships and used fleet boost modules you'll still get use of your skills
(Car dealer says, you can drive your care on these special roads and it'll work just fine)

CCP says you can always buy extractors from us and redistribute your sp (Car dealer say, you can by this special upgrade and drive wherever you want)

Understand now? They sell you a product, then decide after the fact that the product you paid for is no longer going to perform the task that you intended it for when you paid for it. They then try to upsell you more products just so you can get the same benefit from your purchase that you already paid for. More commonly referred to as a scam.

Honestly it really doesn't effect me that much. I started training my link alt to be ongrid combat links back when the command dessi's were released because their creation was an obvious move in the direction of on grid links. It wasn't a matter of if boosts were going on grid it was just when. I extracted my leadership skills from my main and injected the sp into my combat links alt. So again, I planned ahead and don't really have anything to lose w these changes. That still doesn't make their approach to the skills and potential profit from extractors less shady.


Passive bonuses that apply all the time with no effort involved in applying them are exactly what CCP is trying to get rid of with these changes, its something thats been widely disliked for a long time by both players and devs. Yes that going to change how the skills apply in the game but guess what, you're not entitled to have your skills remain a certain way just because its what they were like when you trained them.

Should I complain that theres no longer just one skill for flying Battlecruisers despite it being that way when I trained for them? Should I complain that a lot of my skills have had their prerequisites reduced since I trained them, making them easier to get for others than they were for me?

And yes CCP are pushing skill extractors as a solution. Why? because thats what they were designed to do, to allow people to take skill points they either no longer want or no longer use and put them somewhere else. Yes they cost money but guess what again, CCP is a business not a charity and a business that doesnt try to make money is a business that doesnt last very long. I honestly struggle to see whats in any way shady about pushing a product that function as a direct address to an issue your customers have raised.

Finally I understood your analogy perfectly well, i just thought it was shite and being jaw droppingly condescending about it doesn't make me think its any less shite.



Yea theyre in it to make money but only reason they added thing like skill extractors is to compensate for all of the lost income from accounts being unsubbed because of sh*t changes like which will no doubt cause a lot more accounts to go unsubbed between now and November which will cause them to try and find other ways to make up that lost income otherwise will have to start laying people off and/or pull the plug on the game when they start losing to much money thanks to people with your mindset that people who don't pvp don't belong in EvE
Moraguth
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#336 - 2016-08-29 23:13:16 UTC
Gneeznow wrote:
I've 10 million SP in leadership and I really like these changes. You know why? because I always give my boosts on the field in a BC or Command Destroyer anyway rather than sit in a safe spot.



From my eveboard
" ยท 14 Leadership skills trained, for a total of 15,872,000 skillpoints."

And I support this change for the exact same reason. cheers.

I got a Feature Added!

Stop calling an Abaddon "abba-dawn".  It is "uh-bad-in" dictionary.com/abaddon
Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#337 - 2016-08-29 23:14:25 UTC
Tau Cabalander wrote:
Moac Tor wrote:
Maekchu wrote:
Was wondering about something, since I recall that Fozzie wrote that people will only get weapon timers and no suspect timers.

Let's say you have two corps at war in highsec. Since the boosts are quite strong (which is fine), I suppose people will use neutral boosting alts in order to boost their fleet when fighting war targets. Since the alt is most likely in an NPC corp, and does not seem to get a suspect timer when providing boost, this means you get a 99% safe booster, that is only vulnerable to suicide ganking (which realistically won't be dealt with).

Is this working as intended?

The easy fix is just to have people get suspect timers as logi does. I was just wondering, since it has been stated that people won't get suspect timers.

I am guessing this is to prevent Orca pilots getting suspect timers. Perhaps we could just exclude mining links from giving the suspect timer. It seems wrong for something that powerful to be protected by concord.

You should never be allowed to get someone CONCORDOKKEN for a passive action.

Otherwise CCP would have to record the pilot that applied every boost ("ownership"). Simpler to not do that, and not have consequences to code for.

Are the boosts maintained on system change? That would also be "fun" with boost ownership.

Who said anything about being CONCORDOKKEN'd for a passive action. All we are suggesting is that combat based boosts give the boosting ship a suspect timer so that people can shoot it.
Rikki Bigg
The Graduates
The Initiative.
#338 - 2016-08-29 23:23:27 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
No. The skills will all continue to exist (under slightly different names) and will impact the same type of gameplay, so there are no plans to refund any skills with this change.


I most strenuously disagree. (My opinions do not necessarily reflect the opinions of EVE University)

We have, over the last several years, encouraged our members to train Leadership V, through program incentives at many of our different campuses. Leadership in this exmaple is mainly used to let boosts pass through to the squad members. This way in a larger fleet, that E-Uni might field from time to time, we have adequate members able to let the fleet boosters influence everyone.

While I am grateful that the days of forming fleets in alliance with : x L5/4/4/4/4 will no longer be needed, I have a big issue;
you are removing the passive benefits of Leadership and the four combat and fifth mining warfare skills.

Currently, the skill is a sp sink, but one that has useful side effects so it is not completely pointless without a ship running links.

After the change, you are making it so that someone that has invested 256000 skill points for leadership V, and up to 512000 skill points for each of Mining Foreman, Armored Warfare, Information Warfare, Siege Warfare, and Skirmish Warfare; potentially up to 2.8 million skill points for a player that never planned on running an active link. That does not even consider players that might have trained a few levels in Wing Command, or even bit the bullet and trained Wing Command to V and then Fleet Command to II or III.

We have encouraged new players, in order to be more useful to the group (ie their friends) to invest 618040sp (using the L5/4/4/4/4 example from earlier) and now are explaining that it is a sunk cost, and useless unless they invest more.

Which leads to the essence of my disagreement; your changes, as written here, are bad game design.

CCP Fozzie wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
So, skill bonuses completely removed?


Yes. All passive fleet boosts are being removed including the ones from the skills. The skills will now be 100% dedicated to improving your Command Bursts.


This might impact the same type of gameplay in your mind, but you are putting the cart before the horse.

You have a skill that lets you [verb] a thing, be it a ship, a module, a jump clone, or a corporation. Then you create a secondary skill that improves upon the initial skill, and you make the initial skill the prerequisite.

This is the way every skill in EVE Online currently works. Some of the prerequisites seem to be there to gate skills (like Cloaking needing CPU Management V) but even in those cases the prerequisite skills provide a benefit that stands on its own.

The entry leadership skills, that many people have already sunk skill points into , are being changed so that they offer zero tangible benefit (heck even training Science to V gives you 5% copy speed) unless you invest even more skill points into supplementary skills.

This I have a problem with.
Silven Rubis
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#339 - 2016-08-29 23:34:22 UTC
Rikki Bigg wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
No. The skills will all continue to exist (under slightly different names) and will impact the same type of gameplay, so there are no plans to refund any skills with this change.


I most strenuously disagree. (My opinions do not necessarily reflect the opinions of EVE University)

We have, over the last several years, encouraged our members to train Leadership V, through program incentives at many of our different campuses. Leadership in this exmaple is mainly used to let boosts pass through to the squad members. This way in a larger fleet, that E-Uni might field from time to time, we have adequate members able to let the fleet boosters influence everyone.

While I am grateful that the days of forming fleets in alliance with : x L5/4/4/4/4 will no longer be needed, I have a big issue;
you are removing the passive benefits of Leadership and the four combat and fifth mining warfare skills.

Currently, the skill is a sp sink, but one that has useful side effects so it is not completely pointless without a ship running links.

After the change, you are making it so that someone that has invested 256000 skill points for leadership V, and up to 512000 skill points for each of Mining Foreman, Armored Warfare, Information Warfare, Siege Warfare, and Skirmish Warfare; potentially up to 2.8 million skill points for a player that never planned on running an active link. That does not even consider players that might have trained a few levels in Wing Command, or even bit the bullet and trained Wing Command to V and then Fleet Command to II or III.

We have encouraged new players, in order to be more useful to the group (ie their friends) to invest 618040sp (using the L5/4/4/4/4 example from earlier) and now are explaining that it is a sunk cost, and useless unless they invest more.

Which leads to the essence of my disagreement; your changes, as written here, are bad game design.

CCP Fozzie wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
So, skill bonuses completely removed?


Yes. All passive fleet boosts are being removed including the ones from the skills. The skills will now be 100% dedicated to improving your Command Bursts.


This might impact the same type of gameplay in your mind, but you are putting the cart before the horse.

You have a skill that lets you [verb] a thing, be it a ship, a module, a jump clone, or a corporation. Then you create a secondary skill that improves upon the initial skill, and you make the initial skill the prerequisite.

This is the way every skill in EVE Online currently works. Some of the prerequisites seem to be there to gate skills (like Cloaking needing CPU Management V) but even in those cases the prerequisite skills provide a benefit that stands on its own.

The entry leadership skills, that many people have already sunk skill points into , are being changed so that they offer zero tangible benefit (heck even training Science to V gives you 5% copy speed) unless you invest even more skill points into supplementary skills.

This I have a problem with.


word+1 y rigth
Rovinia
Exotic Dancers Union
Hatakani Trade Winds Combine
#340 - 2016-08-29 23:40:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Rovinia
Thanks Team Five 0 for finally getting rid of this outdated game mechanic.

And thanks to Fozzie and Phantom once more for taking (or tanking) the Nerdrage Blink