These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Mindlinks/Ganglinks/Ongrid Boosting

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ravcharas
Infinite Point
Pandemic Horde
#21 - 2013-05-23 23:23:05 UTC
There's also the factor of grids not always behaving like they are supposed to. I don't know if that is an issue that needs solving before on-grid boosting can be considered, but I would imagine it is, and also that the grid code has some excellent tarpit qualities for unwary programmers to get sucked into - never again to be seen by mortal eyes.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#22 - 2013-05-23 23:32:33 UTC
Ive wondered if "on grid boosting" should be taken verbatim. That is you get the boost only if you are in the same grid.

This has the advantage that the sever already checks if my ship is on the same grid as the boosting ship. It has to to know if it can be displayed in space or on the overview. The rule would be quite easy and should take little extra server time: If my ship can see the boosting ship in space, I get the boost.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Of Essence
#23 - 2013-05-23 23:57:38 UTC  |  Edited by: chatgris
.
chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Of Essence
#24 - 2013-05-23 23:57:56 UTC  |  Edited by: chatgris
CCP Fozzie wrote:
So I do honestly welcome people's cool ideas about what form gang links could take. Don't limit yourself to small changes to the status quo, because it turns out with this system small changes aren't necessarily any faster to implement than off the wall changes.


First off, I think the current system of "be in fleet, activate module, entire subhierarchy gets bonus" to be boring. Apart from that, once ganglinks are brought on grid, it will result in the larger force that is able to keep the ganglink ship perma-repped even more powerful vs the skirmish force than they already are.

I think that ganglinks should be a targeted module - you lock someone and activate the module on them, giving them a bonus like an RSB or Tracking Link. This means that whoever is in the bonus ship is reacting to who is taking damage, or who is trying to burn in for that fast point. It becomes a coordinated activity requiring focus, and not just something someone throws an alt into.

So, to compare. Lets say you are running a standard armor gang with logi, Instead of the booster just activating the modules and orbiting an anchor (assuming on grid boosting was required), for maximum effectiveness the booster might want to use a few cycle and capacitor boosts on some logi pilots (making sure to boost the pilots that are not currently jammed), and the resist boost on the player in their fleet that is currently being primaried.

Yes, I am aware what I am suggesting greatly reduces the number of pilots that can receive boosts from a single player - however, battlecruisers might start "chaining up" for example speed boosts in pairs, actually giving use to the BC link bonus within the fleet.

If you think that my suggestion has nerfed boosting too hard, command ships could possibly have a resistance to damps and ecm, in the form of a role bonus or greatly increased lock range/sensor strength. Command ships could be reworked to include multiple utility high slots, and lots of high slots (8?) encouraging more dispersion of links, instead of just "hey guys I have my alt logging in to the fleet that's going to do nothing so we can boost everyone"

EDIT: Another off the wall idea is the make the link a directed cone that affects all ships (possibly friendly and not friendly?) with their link effect.

Basically, I am going for some kind of directed approach that would actually have the boosting pilot do something interesting, but related to the fight (e.g., no minigame).
Mirima Thurander
#25 - 2013-05-24 00:09:49 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
When we have any timelines to report we'll report them, in the meantime all I can say is that it will happen sometime between now and the end of time. Very likely closer to now than to the end of time, but those things are hard to be certain about. Blink





so, we can expect it around the same time as ring mining and the POS revamp.

All automated intel should be removed from the game including Instant local/jumps/kills/cynos for all systems/regions.Eve should report nothing like this to the client/3rd party software.Intel should not be force fed to players. Player skill and iniative should be the sources of intel.
Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#26 - 2013-05-24 02:46:16 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
paritybit wrote:
Jonas Sukarala wrote:
:) so what is the hold up with offgrid boosting?..... surely putting a range on links would solve the problem ... like a bubble effect


I imagine that the difference is that a bubble effect only has to be checked every time a player tries to warp but links are a persistent effect and would have to be constantly checked to ensure range. This is probably okay for small numbers, but once you get 500 ships on a grid (or even in a system) then you have to check range for every ship at some high rate, meaning lots more operations that have to hit the server.

I also imagine they've thought of this, but maybe it could work sort of like a smartbomb effect but with a bigger effect radius and just happen once every 15 seconds or something.

Or maybe the check could happen upon landing on a grid or when a booster activates or deactivates (including when initiating warp) the link and then persists until the next check.

The guys at CCP are smart and I expect they'll figure it out in time without causing time dilation in systems with only 2 ships in space.


Your thoughts and words are correct and intelligent.

Once the underlying code finishes getting rewritten from the ground up we'll have plenty of options for how to apply links in interesting ways that create interesting gameplay experiences. At the moment we don't have any of those options.

So I do honestly welcome people's cool ideas about what form gang links could take. Don't limit yourself to small changes to the status quo, because it turns out with this system small changes aren't necessarily any faster to implement than off the wall changes.


Make a gang link that decreases strength of webs on the bonused gang,

But only if they are within 10km of the person with that link.

(THAT would make for some interesting fights, and make boosting MUCH more interesting, you need to pilot to get powerful boosts to land properly)

also make a remote microwarpdrive descrambler module that prevents a ship's microwarpdrive from being scrambled. But have it only work within scram range of the person you are using it on.

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
#27 - 2013-05-24 03:45:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
CCP Fozzie wrote:
It's a performance optimization problem. We could turn on range-based boosting in Odyssey but it would melt all the servers.

And this isn't being delayed by Odyssey, the team working on the underlying code that will make ongrid boosting possible (along with many other things) isn't releasing anything in Odyssey. It's just that big of a project.

So like I said before, at some point CCP Veritas will make all my ganglink-related dreams come true but I honestly do not know when that point will be. When Veritas describes a programming challenge as "very hard" I tend to believe him.

How about you change perspective and tweak frequency of those checks and make them booster-centered: on link activation check for range to potentially affected pilots (squad members for squad booster, wing for wing booster, fleet for fleet booster) instead of all players and give those that qualify (in range) a short timed buff/boon. So you'll only have to calculate range once per link cycle per module per booster (you may want to make cycle times of links a bit longer for less server load). Remove those boons(or not, it could be interesting to get bonuses and jump through gate prepared on gate camp) on session change or warp off. If you make those short timed buffs/boons last shorter than link cycle time - it could provide some interesting situations during combat, or will force players to fit 2x same link for constant effect (like dual ASB fits). Another problem is with all those timers added servers may still melt as we clearly saw with crimewatch tags during Asakai event.

tl;dr: Make links smartbomb-like effect with a short timed boost duration. It'll be double awesome if you could see those boosts and their duration somewhere on the UI.

Opinions are like assholes. Everybody got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks.
Seolfor
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#28 - 2013-05-24 05:05:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Seolfor
Ok so here's a simple question and no, this change has nothing to do with On-grid code, but everything to do with boosters:

In the Nov 2012 devblog you talked about major changes to T3 and Command Ship capabilities as booster - namely,

1. the change in % bonus values AND
T3s 2% per level (currently at 5%), CShip-all kinds 3% per level

2. the number of ganglinks that can be fitted innately
Combat Command Ships and T3 Cruisers were apparently planned to go from current ONE to THREE.

Q1: What is the time frame for the change to boosting values (nerf to T3s and buff to CSs)
Q2: What is the time frame for change to number of links T3s and Combat Command Ships can equip

Im asking Q2 with a very specific intent - Warfare Link Specialist 5 is needed to be able to use Command Processors. In itself the skill provides a very minor upgrade and thus is essential for the Command Processor usage, as current T3s cant use more than 1 link without them, but the upgrade to boosting % is meh in itself.

If and when you allow T3s and all-CShips to field 3 links without using Command Processors, this long and frankly underwhelming skill becomes near obsolete - so new boosting characters might as well steer clear of it, or save it for later, much much later. (I anticipate you will hack down its training multiplier when and if these changes hit TQ)

Answers?
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#29 - 2013-05-24 06:24:38 UTC
Why aren't you just cutting their effectiveness for now?

If you are going to do a proper rebalance of them, you would most likely end up doing that anyway. There is no code to be rewritten or any other excuses like that.

Hopefully when you make them on-grid, you'll implement an actual kilometre range limit or effectiveness falloff as well, because while on-grid is better than what we have currently, it would still be awful.
Britta Nolen
Sama Guild
#30 - 2013-05-24 06:44:24 UTC
At the very least, CCP should at least buff All CS boosting to 5% per level instead of 3%. It's flat out ridicolous that a max boosting alt = T3 pilot that also benefits from MUCH MUCH LESS TRAINING REQUIRED FOR THE SHIP.
Random Woman
Very Professional Corporation
#31 - 2013-05-24 07:21:26 UTC
How about switching the mindlink and the ship bonuses? As it stands now, all the skills you invest into leadership and boosting ships dont really compare to the mindlink bonus. Its either put several month into skills or pay 50-200 mil for a mindlink (or make you wallet suffer if you want to give mining boosts).

Also I like the "smartbomb" and "targeting" approch, mentioned here. Though I think a Boosting bomb would be more practical, as it would not conflict with tank-type and slot layout of ships so much.
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#32 - 2013-05-24 07:57:15 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
It's a performance optimization problem. We could turn on range-based boosting in Odyssey but it would melt all the servers....

Get bigger servers? Big smile

What if you outsourced all necessary calculations to a family of hamsters, would only need to shuffle location/range data one way and flags for various boosts the other .. delay is largely irrelevant as a 3-5s lagtime when link bonuses go on/off has no real impact, if you can't control range or you link ships start popping you have far more immediate problems (ie. you are dead).

One of (if not THE) the 'really big bad' when it comes to links is the scalability, a single module being able to give an entire fleet a 30-50% EHP increase is insane.
Split it up and say T3 can boost a squad, T2 (Commands) can boost wings and only Capitals can boost the whole fleet (smaller boost but wider spread). Ought to help with calculations if it is bitesized rather than the whole plate.
Make it range based, with an appropriately obscene lock range/sensors increase on the relevant hulls and use a 'hidden locked list' similar to what I assume is used for watchlists .. again, delay is irrelevant and even natural as a ships native systems is being superseded/overwritten by the link data - considering the boost sizes involved the handshake phase must be maddeningly convoluted Smile

Hell, all I know is that I don't envy Veritas .. quite the pickle we/you got him into.
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#33 - 2013-05-24 07:59:46 UTC
Britta Nolen wrote:
At the very least, CCP should at least buff All CS boosting to 5% per level instead of 3%. It's flat out ridicolous that a max boosting alt = T3 pilot that also benefits from MUCH MUCH LESS TRAINING REQUIRED FOR THE SHIP.


With the upcoming change to the skillreqs, that really won't be the case.

As of now, training into a T3 is faster... with the upcoming changes, that advantage will probably be voided to some extent, as CS IV will yield the same merits that defensive sub to V will have. Battlecruisers take a week longer compared to cruisers, ain't that big a deal either.

When ongridboosting becomes the only option to apply ganglinks, you'll want (imo) so many supportskills/cap skills/tanking skills that the difference of legion against damnation (example with names) won't matter afterall.
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#34 - 2013-05-24 08:28:27 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Discuss away.

As a temporary solution, you could increase cap usage of command links. Up to a level that makes it impossible to run 3 links cap stable on a sub-capital ship.
Bubanni
Corus Aerospace
#35 - 2013-05-24 08:45:54 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
paritybit wrote:
Jonas Sukarala wrote:
:) so what is the hold up with offgrid boosting?..... surely putting a range on links would solve the problem ... like a bubble effect


I imagine that the difference is that a bubble effect only has to be checked every time a player tries to warp but links are a persistent effect and would have to be constantly checked to ensure range. This is probably okay for small numbers, but once you get 500 ships on a grid (or even in a system) then you have to check range for every ship at some high rate, meaning lots more operations that have to hit the server.

I also imagine they've thought of this, but maybe it could work sort of like a smartbomb effect but with a bigger effect radius and just happen once every 15 seconds or something.

Or maybe the check could happen upon landing on a grid or when a booster activates or deactivates (including when initiating warp) the link and then persists until the next check.

The guys at CCP are smart and I expect they'll figure it out in time without causing time dilation in systems with only 2 ships in space.


Your thoughts and words are correct and intelligent.

Once the underlying code finishes getting rewritten from the ground up we'll have plenty of options for how to apply links in interesting ways that create interesting gameplay experiences. At the moment we don't have any of those options.

So I do honestly welcome people's cool ideas about what form gang links could take. Don't limit yourself to small changes to the status quo, because it turns out with this system small changes aren't necessarily any faster to implement than off the wall changes.


I for one have been a huge fan of skirmish links when flying tackle ships... I would have been sad to see off grid boosting removed completly if thats ever the plan... Off grid boosting in my mind gives an advantage to the smaller number players vs larger gangs, if the larger gang hasn't brought links, this is why you can see videos with a single person skirmishing outnumbered :), that would become a thing of the past if off grid boosting was removed completly, as only the bigger fleet would have the defence to have their links on grid... (extreme case)

All that said, using links shouldn't be risk free... I would say that giving the links themselves a noticeable downside to the link ship, such as increase signature radius + decreased sensor strenght by % per link, enough to make them much easier to scan down... combined with links not working within a radius of stations, gates and pos's... would fix the situration people have been complaining about from the off grid boosting...

Supercap nerf - change ewar immunity https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=194759 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934
Mole Guy
Bob's Bait and Tackle
#36 - 2013-05-24 09:01:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Mole Guy
Skia Aumer wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Discuss away.

As a temporary solution, you could increase cap usage of command links. Up to a level that makes it impossible to run 3 links cap stable on a sub-capital ship.



why would they do this? make a ship that specializes in running 3 links then nerf it so that it cannot?

a quick fix would be to change the command ships so they all can run 3 links and have good combat. bring all cs up to 3%.
make all t3 2%. then work on the grid side of things when you get the time. that would kill the "over boost" situation from t3 and make it so the command ships really get used again. wouldnt take but a few days to accomplish all of this.

the question is:

how will mind links affect the new double boosting command ships? i mean lets take amarr. itll boost armor and skirmish. ok, great. i have an armor implant in one of my clones and a mining implant in another. will i have to choose which implant to run to boost one side or the other? does this mean i will get 32% boost in armor from my damnation (due to mind link) and 17% to skirmish? are you going to break mind links up into racial plus mining? amarr would boost armor/skirmish, caldari would boost intel/shield?

how about we do this.

make a general command mind link. one link bonuses all ships. that way we can have a boosting clone and a combat clone instead of 5 clones dedicated to armor, skirmish, shield, intel and mining.
same bonuses to ALL links on ALL boosting ships as if there were individual mind links. the only difference comes in if u have t1 skirmish and t2 armor links. the t1 would not receive a mind link bonus.

as a counter balance/ penalty we could say in order to use t2 links and for the link to work for your specific flavor (armor, skirmish, whatever), you must have that skill (armor warfare spec) maxed out. that will give you the ability for the mindlink to boost skirmish and not just the armor side. one would receive t2 mind link bonuses form armor, and t1 (non mindlink) bonuses to skirmish until you maxed out skirmish. at that time, one would receive max bonus on both.

no more having 5 different mind links. no more having 5 different clones plus combat clone and everything else. i only have room for 5 jc when maxed skill. thats 5 boosters depending on the fleet and 1 combat (limits me to either laser, hams, projectiles, but not all).
TheSkeptic
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2013-05-24 09:07:47 UTC
Mole Guy wrote:

how about we do this.

make a general command mind link. one link bonuses all ships. that way we can have a boosting clone and a combat clone instead of 5 clones dedicated to armor, skirmish, shield, intel and mining.


wtf? why would they ever do this? EVE is about choices and trade offs.

Imo boosts are a powerful advantage and you shouldn't get all boosts at full for free on a single clone.

...

Mole Guy
Bob's Bait and Tackle
#38 - 2013-05-24 09:17:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Mole Guy
you act as if boosting is all i ever do in game. i have other things i like doing as well.
when the fleet needs a booster, they may call on any type of fleet which means we need to be ready.
having 5 clones dedicated to boosting sux. it limits everything we can do in game.

im not talking about making anything more or less powerful. just make one mind link.

so, i only have 1 character for the sake of this discussion. you are telling me my whole existance in game is limited to holding warfare links? i cant do boosting when needed and play with other clones?
i maxed out leadership skills to help other people. but it doesnt define my character. thats just one of his traits.
SMT008
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#39 - 2013-05-24 09:18:24 UTC
A single mindlink would be amazing.

Offgrid boosting makes small gang vs big gang a bit easier (Easier isn't easy, it went from "Very hard" to "Moderatly hard").

If you remove offgrid boosting, you have to implement at least one boosting platform per ship size.

If you remove offgrid boosting, please make it so that boosting ships have a good mobility. You can't boost Vagabond/Cynabal gangs with a Claymore, it's just way too slow.

If you remove offgrid boosting, make it so that the boosting ships still are good combat ships. Having to bring and manage a boosting ship shouldn't mean -1 DPS. Else you're promoting big gangs.

Don't forget that a boosting ship isn't hard to bring in a big gang. A boosting ship in a 5 man gang is 1/5 of the fleet already.

Whatever you do, don't make it pro-big gangs, please.

Quote:
All that said, using links shouldn't be risk free... I would say that giving the links themselves a noticeable downside to the link ship, such as increase signature radius + decreased sensor strenght by % per link, enough to make them much easier to scan down... combined with links not working within a radius of stations, gates and pos's... would fix the situration people have been complaining about from the off grid boosting...


Yes.

Quote:
wtf? why would they ever do this? EVE is about choices and trade offs.

Imo boosts are a powerful advantage and you shouldn't get all boosts at full for free on a single clone.


Boosting requires a massive amount of skillpoints, is a very boring activity, and requires at least 2 jumpclones to be efficient, along with 2 expensive implants. Oh, and you only have 2 ships to boost from. Very slow Commandships that you can't use in anything but BC/BS fleets, or cloakynullifier T3s that won't ever see the grid.

This is why.
Mole Guy
Bob's Bait and Tackle
#40 - 2013-05-24 09:23:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Mole Guy
SMT008 wrote:
A single mindlink would be amazing.

Offgrid boosting makes small gang vs big gang a bit easier (Easier isn't easy, it went from "Very hard" to "Moderatly hard").

If you remove offgrid boosting, you have to implement at least one boosting platform per ship size.

If you remove offgrid boosting, please make it so that boosting ships have a good mobility. You can't boost Vagabond/Cynabal gangs with a Claymore, it's just way too slow.

If you remove offgrid boosting, make it so that the boosting ships still are good combat ships. Having to bring and manage a boosting ship shouldn't mean -1 DPS. Else you're promoting big gangs.

Don't forget that a boosting ship isn't hard to bring in a big gang. A boosting ship in a 5 man gang is 1/5 of the fleet already.

Whatever you do, don't make it pro-big gangs, please.

Quote:
All that said, using links shouldn't be risk free... I would say that giving the links themselves a noticeable downside to the link ship, such as increase signature radius + decreased sensor strenght by % per link, enough to make them much easier to scan down... combined with links not working within a radius of stations, gates and pos's... would fix the situration people have been complaining about from the off grid boosting...


Yes.

Quote:
wtf? why would they ever do this? EVE is about choices and trade offs.

Imo boosts are a powerful advantage and you shouldn't get all boosts at full for free on a single clone.


Boosting requires a massive amount of skillpoints, is a very boring activity, and requires at least 2 jumpclones to be efficient, along with 2 expensive implants. Oh, and you only have 2 ships to boost from. Very slow Commandships that you can't use in anything but BC/BS fleets, or cloakynullifier T3s that won't ever see the grid.

This is why.



i for saw this discussion 5 months ago and posted this back then..

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1577132#post1577132

we make command ships all nice and tough to kill, but who is going to wanna take a group of fast roamers through null with a slow command ship behind them.
we need a SubCommand ship. a destroyer based command. descent resists, and he ability to run links. or one link..maybe 2. whatever.