These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Off grid boosting fix is like waiting for a miracle?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#61 - 2013-01-25 02:05:09 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
No idea, but my assumption is she's getting smacked in the face with a nerf bat. Just as my loki/legion/tengu/proteus/eos/claymore/damnation/vulture pilots are.

-Liang

It was my understanding that fleet command ships were getting a buff, as in getting bonuses to two types of boosts instead of one. Damnation for example would give the 3% bonus per level to armored and skirmish, Claymore to siege and skirmish, eos to information and armored, and vulture to information and siege (IIRC, the exact combinations may be different).

The T3s would get a 2% bonus per level to three types of boosts, so a Tengu could boost information, skirmish, and siege for example.


This is correct accordingly to latest information delivered by CCP devs


So apparently CCP Fozzie is not a CCP dev or a CCP game designer? I linked you to his post and quoted it here. Links are getting smacked in the face, both on grid and off. It sounds like the entire mechanics may change eventually.

-Liang



I'm not sure I would read it that way.


"Reducing ganglink bonuses and increasing effectiveness in other ways
As I've said before, this is something we definitely want to do. Links are both too effective in their direct bonuses as well as their ability to be used off-grid. However getting this specific issue fixed is going to need to wait until after 1.1. Once we have the room to implement some changes to the way warfare links work from the ground up, expect changes to a lot of other modules and mechanics to happen at the same time."


It sounds like they may decrease the current effects but add other effects.

But thanks for the link it sounds like it may not be that far off.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Caltharian
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#62 - 2013-01-25 03:08:20 UTC
It also depends on how the code for skill and link bonuses is engrained into the fleet code, as before Fleets came out we only had gangs and back then skill bonuses only applied on grid

If i remember correctly it was back some time in 2007 that the Fleet tool came out and for a short while both sets of code were active so you could set up the more formal fleet or the less formal gang.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#63 - 2013-01-25 03:56:11 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
No idea, but my assumption is she's getting smacked in the face with a nerf bat. Just as my loki/legion/tengu/proteus/eos/claymore/damnation/vulture pilots are.

-Liang

It was my understanding that fleet command ships were getting a buff, as in getting bonuses to two types of boosts instead of one. Damnation for example would give the 3% bonus per level to armored and skirmish, Claymore to siege and skirmish, eos to information and armored, and vulture to information and siege (IIRC, the exact combinations may be different).

The T3s would get a 2% bonus per level to three types of boosts, so a Tengu could boost information, skirmish, and siege for example.


This is correct accordingly to latest information delivered by CCP devs


So apparently CCP Fozzie is not a CCP dev or a CCP game designer? I linked you to his post and quoted it here. Links are getting smacked in the face, both on grid and off. It sounds like the entire mechanics may change eventually.

-Liang

5% per level ship bonuses are getting removed from T3 boosting subsystems according to the changes I was talking about.
That probably qualifies as a smack in the face.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#64 - 2013-01-25 05:14:02 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:

5% per level ship bonuses are getting removed from T3 boosting subsystems according to the changes I was talking about.
That probably qualifies as a smack in the face.


Not really.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#65 - 2013-01-25 07:23:07 UTC
Tbh if what was stated in OP as a reason is true, then EVE core programming must be all kinds of trainwreck by now. And that means CCP's best bet to stay is business is to go with EVE2 (however you go about it). But we're getting DUST instead.

Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Brutus King
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#66 - 2013-01-25 08:24:48 UTC
Buhhdust Princess wrote:
I guess that's because really, CCP are a business, and will go with the masses to create the most profit. It's a shame to wave goodbye to such an adrenaline pumping, exciting game, and welcome this "Not-so-sandbox" they're slowly creating.

And yeah, CCP have only boosted solo in 3 ways the last few years.
1. Tech 3 Cruiser Boosts
2. Ancilliary Shield Boosters
3. Making blasters good again.

For that i'm thankful, however, for what we're about to recieve, I am not.

P.S. CCP, If 1 person could change your mind, DO NOT REMOVE OFF GRID BOOSTING. You're nerfing it enough already.
P.P.S. Sorry for completely hi-jacking your thread OP.
-Buhhd

Boosting yourself with an alt is not solo.
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#67 - 2013-01-25 08:26:22 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
No idea, but my assumption is she's getting smacked in the face with a nerf bat. Just as my loki/legion/tengu/proteus/eos/claymore/damnation/vulture pilots are.

-Liang

It was my understanding that fleet command ships were getting a buff, as in getting bonuses to two types of boosts instead of one. Damnation for example would give the 3% bonus per level to armored and skirmish, Claymore to siege and skirmish, eos to information and armored, and vulture to information and siege (IIRC, the exact combinations may be different).

The T3s would get a 2% bonus per level to three types of boosts, so a Tengu could boost information, skirmish, and siege for example.


This is correct accordingly to latest information delivered by CCP devs


So apparently CCP Fozzie is not a CCP dev or a CCP game designer? I linked you to his post and quoted it here. Links are getting smacked in the face, both on grid and off. It sounds like the entire mechanics may change eventually.

-Liang


Well not trying to justify whatever but as far as my reading comprehension goes, and I know I'm bad at it, the only numbers thrown yet by dev's are those mentioned by James.
Notice I'm not discrediting Fozzie comment, not at all, but he's only delivering general thoughts in this specific matter so for the meanwhile it's safe to think these changes will hit as soon as Command ships changes are set, which would be reasonable, and something around the initial announced numbers.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
To mare
Advanced Technology
#68 - 2013-01-25 08:36:39 UTC
they should make a bubble effect about 100k radius if you are inside the bubble and in the same fleet you get the bonus, outside the bubble no bonus, maybe a falloff effect of 50k where you get diminished boost.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#69 - 2013-01-25 08:48:53 UTC
To mare wrote:
they should make a bubble effect about 100k radius if you are inside the bubble and in the same fleet you get the bonus, outside the bubble no bonus, maybe a falloff effect of 50k where you get diminished boost.
No, no, no. They should make it 25Km and reduce the tanking abilities of boosting ships so they can only fit a DCU. Better?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
To mare
Advanced Technology
#70 - 2013-01-25 09:04:40 UTC
Mag's wrote:
To mare wrote:
they should make a bubble effect about 100k radius if you are inside the bubble and in the same fleet you get the bonus, outside the bubble no bonus, maybe a falloff effect of 50k where you get diminished boost.
No, no, no. They should make it 25Km and reduce the tanking abilities of boosting ships so they can only fit a DCU. Better?

u mad about losing your OP toys?
Mag's
Azn Empire
#71 - 2013-01-25 09:20:08 UTC
To mare wrote:
Mag's wrote:
To mare wrote:
they should make a bubble effect about 100k radius if you are inside the bubble and in the same fleet you get the bonus, outside the bubble no bonus, maybe a falloff effect of 50k where you get diminished boost.
No, no, no. They should make it 25Km and reduce the tanking abilities of boosting ships so they can only fit a DCU. Better?

u mad about losing your OP toys?
Show me on the doll, where the bad booster touched you. Straight

One thing is for sure. You're worrying that the on grid change, isn't going to work as you'd hoped and I have a feeling you'll be oh so mad when it arrives. Twisted

Too easy. Lol

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
To mare
Advanced Technology
#72 - 2013-01-25 09:24:15 UTC
Mag's wrote:
To mare wrote:
Mag's wrote:
To mare wrote:
they should make a bubble effect about 100k radius if you are inside the bubble and in the same fleet you get the bonus, outside the bubble no bonus, maybe a falloff effect of 50k where you get diminished boost.
No, no, no. They should make it 25Km and reduce the tanking abilities of boosting ships so they can only fit a DCU. Better?

u mad about losing your OP toys?
Show me on the doll, where the bad booster touched you. Straight

One thing is for sure. You're worrying that the on grid change, isn't going to work as you'd hoped and I have a feeling you'll be oh so mad when it arrives. Twisted

Too easy. Lol

actually i use an offgrid booster because pretty much everyone do it, i just hope ccp put a stop on that so i can go back to paying 1 account only
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#73 - 2013-01-25 09:45:52 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:

5% per level ship bonuses are getting removed from T3 boosting subsystems according to the changes I was talking about.
That probably qualifies as a smack in the face.


Not really.

-Liang

I should probably stop being vague.

-Liang

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
mechtech
Ice Liberation Army
#74 - 2013-01-25 09:47:37 UTC
The technical limitation is simply that applying and comparing gang bonuses is an exponentially increasing computational load as participants increase in number. Loads like this are ultimately what end up limiting fleet fight sizes.

Adding a range check would make this section of each server tick much heavier, and certainly it would lower large fleet server performance measurably.
Othran
Route One
#75 - 2013-01-25 10:08:27 UTC
mechtech wrote:
The technical limitation is simply that applying and comparing gang bonuses is an exponentially increasing computational load as participants increase in number. Loads like this are ultimately what end up limiting fleet fight sizes.

Adding a range check would make this section of each server tick much heavier, and certainly it would lower large fleet server performance measurably.


Spot on. There was a similar sort of check going on with standings of everyone in FW fights 3 years or so ago and that resulted in hideous lag if there was more than 10 people on grid.

I'm trying to imagine a situation where every ship on grid would have to report its position to the server which would then have to calculate whether they were on the same grid as the booster. Even without any grid-fu (which happens to some extent on every gate due to cans/bubbles/wrecks etc) it'd be a nightmare.

You can't do it by range otherwise the booster could sit just off-grid (grid-fu again).

Needs a complete rewrite of fleet/booster code I reckon. Not going to happen anytime soon IMHO, not with all the other crap that desperately needs fixing/updating.
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#76 - 2013-01-25 10:08:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Barrogh Habalu
Mag's wrote:
One thing is for sure. You're worrying that the on grid change, isn't going to work as you'd hoped and I have a feeling you'll be oh so mad when it arrives. Twisted

On the other hand, grid can be manipulated and sometimes outright f***ed up, so...
Actually, people assumed that "bringing boosters on grid" meant bringing them into fleet composition, with actual player who actually flies the ship that does more than just cycling links. Ship that sits aligned 300 km away from the rest of the fleet it boosts is just another flavour of current OGB tbh (where you will need something like inty instead of prober to attempt to counter it, and that's the main difference), and I can agree that remaking them into that will make little sense.

Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
mama guru
Yazatas.
#77 - 2013-01-25 10:20:25 UTC  |  Edited by: mama guru
Boostings primirary function when they were introduced was to homogenize fleets. It did so successfully, but like all offgrid activity it produces large gains for individuals or gangs with little or no risk.

It should be scrapped just like carriers launching fighters from pos shields was. Just like Titans with remote aoe doomsdays were. The problem is out of control and there is no discussion to be had here. Get rid of them.


Say what you will about falcon alts for example. Atleast they are in lockrange with all the risk that goes with it.

EVE online is the fishermans friend of MMO's. If it's too hard you are too weak.
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#78 - 2013-01-25 10:21:46 UTC
Mag's wrote:
One thing is for sure. You're worrying that the on grid change, isn't going to work as you'd hoped and I have a feeling you'll be oh so mad when it arrives. Twisted

Personally avoid using links as well as fight people with them because they are broken, so 'meh'. But yeah, given CCPs track-record and tendency to cave to public outcry (What happened to the the awesome S.Carrier support craft concept?).

No matter what solution is chosen to enact the change it will be at the mercy of grid-fu shenanigans, the one exception is if grids are abolished and everything is done by range, but doubt that is technically feasible due to server load and what not.

Which brings me to: We already have a hard limit of 250km to everything related to targeting so that calculation/DB lookup must exist. Is it not possible to say that links only provide their effects if they meet the those criteria .. hell, could probably get away with slapping a lock-range boost on the links themselves and say that "if you can lock it you can boost it".
Yim Sei
Ontogenic Achronycal PLC
#79 - 2013-01-25 11:01:18 UTC
We all know there is no such thing as a fair fight in Eve.

IMHO the offgrid boosting is certainly a bit of a pussy tool, similarly to the guy shouting for 1v1 GFs with his cloaky falcon alt.

There is no difference.

I tried to find some pew the other day, just me on my own in an Omen.
Finally found a guy who immediately changed ship to a Tornado clumsily tried to get range to snipe and etc etc.
Obviosly that didnt work so went back to a stabber - probes cam out (why I was 100k off the station?) and before he dropped in the T3 undocks.
Seriouisly this is what solo PvP is about now?
Obviously I tipped my hat at the lady and left.

Its seems to me to be all about NO RISK whatever happens.
As soon as some obvious OP tactic gets nerfed they are out in droves defending their NO RISK PvP.

Some of the drivel on here is just painful to read - tldr "Dont nerf my I WIN button!!!"

As far as the technical issues surrounding this - and I dont prefer to be an expert on what will work for the game (like 99.9% of this Omnicient community Roll )

.. Why cant the boosts work on a ranged basis? doesnt the Orca work like this?

One thing to remember is that if this is removed from T3, its not like it makes the ships useless. They have many other roles.

Post with my main? This is my main - I just overtrain and overplay my alts.
Shpenat
Ironman Inc.
Transgress
#80 - 2013-01-25 12:03:00 UTC
Yim Sei wrote:
We all know there is no such thing as a fair fight in Eve.

IMHO the offgrid boosting is certainly a bit of a ***** tool, similarly to the guy shouting for 1v1 GFs with his cloaky falcon alt.

There is no difference.

I tried to find some pew the other day, just me on my own in an Omen.
Finally found a guy who immediately changed ship to a Tornado clumsily tried to get range to snipe and etc etc.
Obviosly that didnt work so went back to a stabber - probes cam out (why I was 100k off the station?) and before he dropped in the T3 undocks.
Seriouisly this is what solo PvP is about now?
Obviously I tipped my hat at the lady and left.

Its seems to me to be all about NO RISK whatever happens.
As soon as some obvious OP tactic gets nerfed they are out in droves defending their NO RISK PvP.

Some of the drivel on here is just painful to read - tldr "Dont nerf my I WIN button!!!"

As far as the technical issues surrounding this - and I dont prefer to be an expert on what will work for the game (like 99.9% of this Omnicient community Roll )

.. Why cant the boosts work on a ranged basis? doesnt the Orca work like this?

One thing to remember is that if this is removed from T3, its not like it makes the ships useless. They have many other roles.



The range based boosts are computational heavy and scales horribly with number of people on grid. I doubt CCP will be willing to go that way.