Player Features and Ideas Discussion

N+1 game play does not only mean N+1 on grid, but that you need N+1 ships to engage successfully.

Links are the epitome of N+1 Gameplay, because you often need your own links to balance the playing field.

And please elaborate the problems you foresee created by moving links on grid?

N+1 ships needed to win is precisely the problem, I fly with three people at most, we can't play N+1 and we don't want to, it's boring as hell.

Links are not N+1, you get one set of links, that's just N. Prop mods are not N+1, you use one (maybe two) prop mods, that's just N. Points are not N+1 you use one (maybe two) points, that's just N.

You clearly have NO idea what we are talking about if you think links mean N+1.

You move links on grid, only blobs use them, I fly with three people, one of us using a dedicated link ship would be completely stupid, whereas it isn't out of the question for a blob to bring a dedicated link boat.

It's almost as if you're trying very hard to sound logical and reasonable, while frantically hoping people actually accept the nonsense you type.

Off-grid boosting needs to go.

Wow.... I think we need to clarify some terminology:

The N+1 dilemma is that to engage a specific set of N ships, you need to bring N+1 Ships to successfully engage. When used in reference to EvE, we generally don't explicitly mean ONE more ship, but the idea that you need "more ships" to successfully engage.

For Example: Imagine two groups of EvE ships fighting each other: Side A vs Side B.
If A consists of 3 Rifters and side B consists of 3 Rifters, the fight is potentially balanced and both sides may chose to engage with the expectation (or at least hope) of success.

However, 3 Frigates is not necessarily an even engagement against 3 other frigates when some of those frigates are force multipliers.

Force mutlipliers include logistics ships:
If side A has 2 Bantams and a Merlin vs side B's 3x Merlins, side B has no chance of winning the engagement. Their 3x merlins don't have the firepower to overcome the Bantam reps. For side B to win, they need to bring enough ships to overpower the RR from the bantoms (or some way to neutralize it).

Force multipliers include EWAR ships:
If side A has 2x Merlins and a Griffin vs Side B's 3x Merlins, side B has no chance of winning the engagement. The griffin may jam out the opposing ships and minimize their contribution to the fight. For side B to win, they need to bring enough ships to fight regardless of the griffins jams.

Links are ALSO a force multiplier:
Links may provide extra speed and tackle range, make your ship harder to catch and hold.
Links may provide extra tank and rep ability, greatly increasing the amount of damage required to destroy you.
Links may provide other benefits, like lower sig radius for damage reduction, higher ship attributes to make you less susceptible to EWAR, and even boost your EWAR to be more effective.

If side A has 2 Merlins and a Siege Warfare Booster vs Side B with 3x Merlins, Side B has no chance of winning the engagement. The boosts to ship stats from the warfare links completely will enable Side A to obliterate Side B. For Side B to win, they need to bring their own links, or they need to bring enough ships to overpower your two merlins.

What is worse with links: Side B often doesn't know you have links in the fight, obfuscating the boosts you have and pragmatically, side B honestly has little recourse to eliminate the benefits your links provide.

Links play a MAJOR role in the N+1 game dilemma.

Try re-reading my post and get back to me, or hell re-read your own damn post, you simultaneously posit that

"When used in reference to EvE, we generally don't explicitly mean ONE more ship, but the idea that you need "more ships" to successfully engage. "

while also saying that

"Links play a MAJOR role in the N+1 game dilemma. "

So you've said N+1 is a general concept meant to refer to the fact that you need more ships to beat a group, i.e. a numerical advantage.

While also saying that a bonus, which is a flat bonus, you put one skirmish evasive maneuvering boost out, it doesn't stack, is a problem with N+1.

It inherently CAN'T be a N+1 problem because the effects DON'T stack. The effect of weapons stack in the form of increased DPS, that's an N+1 problem where you need more guns to break more tanks.

Having more than one of the same link type does absolutely nothing.

If you make non-logical statements expect people call them for what they are.

Yes, you bring links, they bring links, now it is balanced. That is N gameplay

N+1 gameplay is where, I bring logi, so they bring two logi ships so i need to bring two more, so they bring 5 more, so i need to bring 20 more ships.

You CAN NOT stack links, and so it is NOT N+1 gameplay.

I finally understand what you are trying to say. Logistics ships create a recursive growth situation, where Side A brings 4 Logi to tank 10 ships, so Side B brings 15 ships to overpower the reps, so Side A brings in more logi to tank the dps, which creates an ever growing cycle of one side constantly bringing more and needing more to win.

Logistics ships are in a particularly potent situation, in that they scale very effectively to really pronounce this effect. Alternatively, EWAR doesn't scale anywhere near was well, as trying to coordinate jams or damps or tracks among a large number targets is very difficult to pull off, although it has been utilized to some success (see ****-you fleets and the like). Your arguing that links, since they are a static benefit to all ships in the fleet, don't create the recursive situation that escalates into enormous numbers. This is precisely why links are NOT a problem in large fleet warfare, although you are strongly delusional if you believe links don't play a pivotal role in fleet vs fleet combat, especially when one fleet is able to neutralize the links of another fleet.

You are right in the notion that links may only be brought into play once. However, the benefits links provide are very much potent enough that your opponent typically must bring their own links or more ships to rebalance the field and successfully engage.

Just because the benefits of a link ship are a one-time boost to the stats of every ship in fleet does NOT mean it isn't a force multiplier contributing to the N+1 game. Instead, it means their contribution to the N+1 game is very well limited to smaller scales of N.

*edit*

And as Gregor Parud pointed out, links combine with other force multipliers (like logistics rep ability and ships EHP levels) to have a major impact on the N+1 game at sizes of combat.

Alright, so how about we give boosted ships a little tag on their ship icon to indicate that they're being boosted? Would solve the problem as far as I'm concerned. I'm not saying that off grid boosting is the problem. The problem is not KNOWING if a fleet is boosted.

CCP is aware of this, don't worry. The only reason mining foreman links can operate behind POS shields is that CCP also realises that Rorquals & Orcas need some attention if they are going to be providing boosts on-grid.