These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Why We Should Support Off Grid Boosting
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jake Warbird
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#21 - 2013-06-20 16:01:18 UTC
I support OP. You noobs sure as hell don't know how to solo pvp. You all suck.

Sugar Von MurdererTits : Jake Warbird gets my vote for most intriguing and attractive male character in Eve.
Ziphis
Dingus Coalition
#22 - 2013-06-20 16:10:09 UTC
Destination SkillQueue wrote:
The mere fact you people defend the existance of off grid boosting by using solo PvP as justification is pretty hilarious. First, there is nothing solo about it, if you're using multiple characters at the same time. Second, if using boosters has truly come to the point, that solo players feel they can't fight without using one, it's just one more reason to let OGB die in a fire.


Quoting this person as I completely agree solo pvpers go around ALONE the fact is in name solo the while solo pvp those who go round with booster alts are in a fleet hence not solo, with CCP hopefully putting these alts on the grid it gives real solo pvpers a chance a small chance yes but a chance none the less of getting the boosts out of the equation

He was the sort of person who stood on mountaintops during thunderstorms in wet copper armour shouting 'All the Gods are bastards.'  - T. Pratchett
Rath Kelbore
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#23 - 2013-06-20 16:11:30 UTC
Other than the programming perspective, I disagree with all of your points.

There is no reason for a ship that isn't on grid to be able to give tangible benefits to ships "on grid".

I used the word tangible in hopes that it will keep the nerf afk cloaking group at bay.

Plus, with some re-balancing, we should see an increase in command ship use. Which I think would be a good thing.

I plan on living forever.......so far, so good.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#24 - 2013-06-20 16:19:46 UTC
If two fleets run into each other, you can be sure that both have off grid boosts.

So, in that respect having OGB or not is a moot point since everyone is using it.

To me the issue is being able to boost from inside a POS shield. That gives a distinct advantage to the defenders that should already have the advantage anyway (if they're not complete morons).

I would advocate that off grid is fine since the ships are still vulnerable, but boosting from behind a shield is disabled. That's balance, not a nerf.

Mr Epeen Cool
Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2013-06-20 16:21:24 UTC
They should remove boosts altogether..
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#26 - 2013-06-20 16:37:55 UTC
From the point of view of a Rorqual/Orca pilot, the removal of off-grid boosting would be fatal to their use in mining ops in null. They aren't used for anything else. People who use them for hauling or as an on-grid boost lose them eventually. Might as well delete them from the game. Paradoxically, the only place the Orca would be used thereafter would be in high sec mining.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#27 - 2013-06-20 16:46:11 UTC
Victoria Sin wrote:
From the point of view of a Rorqual/Orca pilot, the removal of off-grid boosting would be fatal to their use in mining ops in null. They aren't used for anything else. People who use them for hauling or as an on-grid boost lose them eventually. Might as well delete them from the game. Paradoxically, the only place the Orca would be used thereafter would be in high sec mining.


Yeah people lose ships in EVE. 'Tis true.

So you think that because someone can't be arsed to put in the time to train a Rorq pilot properly, that they should be essentially invulnerable?

POS bashing to kill a booster? That just doesn't sit right with me.

Mr Epeen Cool
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#28 - 2013-06-20 16:57:22 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:

So you think that because someone can't be arsed to put in the time to train a Rorq pilot properly, that they should be essentially invulnerable?

POS bashing to kill a booster? That just doesn't sit right with me.


I really have no idea what they hell you're going on about. Time to train a Rorqual doesn't make any difference to it being a massive brick that's going to get hot-dropped and popped, at 2.5b a go.
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
#29 - 2013-06-20 16:57:53 UTC
ITT: Lots of people who haven't read the OP. And by "read" I really mean "understood", I'm just being polite.
Domanique Altares
Rifterlings
#30 - 2013-06-20 17:03:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Domanique Altares
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
I've said this before, many times, and I'll say it again: off-grid boosting is an equalizing factor for battles with numerical disparities.

If two forces of different size are fighting each other, and the boosting can be done off-grid, then the forces are proportionally as efficient as if there was no boosting at all, assuming no significant differences in boosting skills.

If two forces of different size are fighting each other, and the boosting can only be done on-grid, then the larger force gets a significant advantage over the smaller force, because:

1. the larger force is more able to defend its boosting ships due to being able to proportionally field more logistics
2. the larger force is more able to attack the smaller force's boosting ships because its superior DPS overpowers them quicker
3. the larger force, by its very nature, is more able to field backup boosting ships to immediately replace the ones lost due to enemy action

These three factors combined would make smaller forces objectively worse off when fighting larger ones, and that is on top of having a numerical disadvantage, than they are today.

So, if you advocate on-grid boosting, you're basically saying "I like to blob my enemies, and it would be nice if CCP made it so that I could blob my enemies more efficiently. Please, CCP, change this mechanic so that I am able to use my organization's superior numbers to an even greater advantage over smaller parties. Creating such a disincentive to small-scale pvp would really help me further my own goals at the expense of the game as a whole."


Using this logic as my basis, I have determined that no one should feel the need to field logi, since logi should be allowed to rep from off grid behind a POS bubble, remaining safe alongside the boosting ship as a force multiplier.
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
#31 - 2013-06-20 17:04:00 UTC
Call Rollard wrote:
I personally think that Off Grid Boosting should remain for mining etc, Rorq's are too risky to bring into a site.

But then in Combat, you require on-grid boosts for the boosting modules, so Vulture, Loki etc. Cov ops boosting must not be cloaked to give boosts.

For combat. I believe the boosting modules must be used on-grid, however your general boosting levels can be done offgrid.

Comment on this suggestion.


Wouldn't you love to do all your carebear activities without leaving your pos? Like for exemple offgrid mining? Sarcasm off.


Remove all type of OGB from the game.

The Tears Must Flow
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
#32 - 2013-06-20 17:06:14 UTC
Victoria Sin wrote:
Mr Epeen wrote:

So you think that because someone can't be arsed to put in the time to train a Rorq pilot properly, that they should be essentially invulnerable?

POS bashing to kill a booster? That just doesn't sit right with me.


I really have no idea what they hell you're going on about. Time to train a Rorqual doesn't make any difference to it being a massive brick that's going to get hot-dropped and popped, at 2.5b a go.


And? What's the problem again? That's the whole reason why their are ships in space, to be blown up.

The Tears Must Flow
Evei Shard
Shard Industries
#33 - 2013-06-20 17:07:25 UTC
In my own opinion, I see two potential options to solve the problem.

Option A) Off grid boosting is just fine as it is, but make non-corp/non-alliance fleet members legal targets during wartime. OGB is used quite often in high-sec wars, and, unlike null, is a risk-free tactic.

Option B) Remove OGB completely, and then rework the Rorqual and Orca so they can either fill other roles, or make them more viable in a belt. I'm not completely sure, but do you even need scramblers currently to prevent a Rorqual from warping? Just bump it out of alignment with a BC or BS.

Profit favors the prepared
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#34 - 2013-06-20 17:10:20 UTC
Vaju Enki wrote:

And? What's the problem again? That's the whole reason why their are ships in space, to be blown up.


It's not a problem. It's just that only an idiot uses one on-grid when mining. My point: Nobody will bother, might as well delete the ships from the game.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#35 - 2013-06-20 17:11:05 UTC
So the game can't lose OGB because of legacy?

Why not an OGB jamming module?

And let that be OG too.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Evei Shard
Shard Industries
#36 - 2013-06-20 17:21:10 UTC
Victoria Sin wrote:
Vaju Enki wrote:

And? What's the problem again? That's the whole reason why their are ships in space, to be blown up.


It's not a problem. It's just that only an idiot uses one on-grid when mining. My point: Nobody will bother, might as well delete the ships from the game.


They can be repurposed if needed and still be useful.

Examples (horrible ones, but examples):

Drop the ore hold out of the Orca, and shift the excess to the ship maintenance bay and the cargohold/fleet hangar (with the bulk going to the ship maintenance bay). The Orca fills a high-sec freighter role with the focus on carrying ships that are already fitted, and remove the ability to plastic wrap fitted ships.

Require the Rorqual to be at a POS, and turn it into a mobile refinery (as I suggested in the F&I forum). Make it capable of high level refining ability using a second type of industrial core. Pilots have the option of ore compression (for transport to a full refinery), or refining on the spot (for a %5 or %10 loss in refine).

Profit favors the prepared
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#37 - 2013-06-20 17:26:05 UTC
I propose that we make boosting on-grid and move PVP off-grid, instead. Imagine two Lokis staring each other down at the sun while their fleets warred from within the safety of their POS shields.

It would be awesome.

(More seriously, you could fix a lot of the problems with the Rorqual by revisiting its design, because I don't like the idea that the solution to its being 100% vulnerable if deployed is that it should be 100% safe, instead.)

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
Lara Dantreb
Reisende des Schwarzschild Grenze
#38 - 2013-06-20 17:28:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Lara Dantreb
Off Grid Boosting is one of the things that bothers me the least.

I believe it's hard to change and I prefer devs focusing on more entertaining stuff (POS revamp, more contents, new nullsec space, new subsystems, ship revamp)

If one needs a booster to kill my ship, it's really not my problem. (This game is unfair by nature, and must remain unfair)

In fact I'm much more concerned by ISBoxing which is a disguised way of botting...

---   Buying T2 ship bpos since 2005  ---
Domanique Altares
Rifterlings
#39 - 2013-06-20 17:29:09 UTC
Here's what I think might make OGB more acceptable:

1. OGB cannot be conducted from inside a POS bubble. Sorry, but your **** should be available to be killed.

2. OGB should not be the fun, always-on, let's be logged in 23/7 for no in-game cost behind our POS bubble setup. Ganglink modules should enjoy a fuel cost. A lot of fuel cost. Burn that liquid ozone. Or better, racial fuel types appropriate to each set of links. Ganglinks should also come with both a timer and a cooldown. Ten minutes on, ten minutes off, or something of that nature. As long as a boosting ship is under an active module timer, the ship is unable to dock, unable to warp, and unable to activate jump gates, acceleration gates, jump to a cyno or be bridged. The ship is effectively married to that system for the next 10 minutes. The pilot may not eject. The ship may move under normal propulsion and prop mods, and engage in combat as normal.

3. The ship should bloat up for scanning purposes. Activating a ganglink should put you in danger of being probed down by anyone with a modicum of skills; no more ECCM games or other nonsense that would hinder someone without max skills, tons of modules, or implants. Boost off-grid if you must, but never more enjoy the safety of being unable to be found/****** with.

You want to run constant links, you bring more than one booster; this is not a problem for some larger alliances/fleets, but begins to cut down on systems with resident booster alts and 'elite solo' nonsense. Links would be most effective at the beginning of a fight, or could be used strategically in the event of a tipping point if someone can bring only one booster into play.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#40 - 2013-06-20 17:42:47 UTC
Poe's law is strong in this one.