EVE General Discussion

Ask yourself this question: what is the difference between an off-grid booster that you don't know is present, and an off-grid logistics that you don't know is present?

If you can name a legit, objective difference, then you have some semblance of an argument.

o/

Since this is my first forum post and to make you better understand where my point is coming from i'll write a few words about myself. I'm relatively new to pvp and I have been mainly engaged in faction warfare. So far I had a great time doing solo pvp and currently I'm learning how to pilot manually and this means -as any pvp related learning process in eve- losing a lot of ships.

I don't mind losing a lot of ships, really.... What is annoying though is losing them not mainly because of personal failure but because of a mechanic which greatly shift the odds against newer individual players in favor of players who are willing and able to pay for a second account . I personally use speed implants only to stand a chance against boosted targets and i have to risk them all the time against the odds of dc and smartbombing battleships. If I wanted to have that extra web and point range that come with the fleet booster I had to fly slicers at the cost of a pirate cruiser!

Boosted pilots on the other hand get all these bonuses at the price of minimal Risk . While pilots without a second account have to throw all their assets into the ring every time they engage in combat boosted pilots just park their booster at station and dock up as soon as any danger occurs. It seems to me that off grid boosting therfore simply breaks the most important meta mechanics of eve pvp: Risk vs Reward. This is exactly why fighting boosted pilots can feel like playing a game of rigged cards.

I don't know if i'm right about everything I stated here and I'm glad to hear different opinions on this but there's one thing i know for sure: This mechanic is not good to acquire new players. In fact it's terrible in that regard. It massively shifts the odds against individual entrepreneurs in favor of "older" more established players and groups of players due to "out-of-game" physics aka paying for a second account with rl money.

I suspect that's why many boosting pilots i talked to stated they don't like using links but they feel forced to use them to compete. Therefore my question: Are there any plans to change this mechanic? Making boosts (rightfully!) show up on kb's would imo be a step in the right direction. What else could be done? Or am i seeing things the wrong way? Please discuss :-)

Off grid boosters are great for solo pvp, if you have the scanning skills.

*POW* right in the kisser!

The people who complain about off-grid boosting don't understand where the problem truly lies. It's not a matter of your enemies getting this great advantage that you aren't getting, but the fact that you're fighting one against two, and complaining that the odds aren't even. If they force boosters on-grid, or removed them entirely, all that's going to happen is that those people are going to bring a logistics ship instead, or simply engage you with two combat ships, and you'll have the same exact problem that you're complaining about right now.

But as I've mentioned in previous threads like this one throughout the years, making boosting a grid-only affair is actually a bad thing. For example, look at my post here. Actually, I'll go ahead and paste it into this reply:

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."

I prefer my idea, the further away the ships the less effective the links. This way a solo player with links off-grid will still see some benefit with little risk to the boosting ship where as players who have links on grid will see more of a benefit but now they risk losing that ship during the fight.


Your whole post sounds like a solo player who wants the links for an advantage with no risk.

There seem to be a few mechanics around that minimize the risk to the point that there is no risk. (These need to be addressed)

Don't try to cherry-pick your arguments like that. We're talking about a 1v1+1 scenario here. If you're already engaged with an enemy who's tackling you, there's nothing you can do about that logistics cruiser that comes on grid 70km away from you. I know this for a fact, because I've been doing wars for the past forever, and that's how every such engagement played out. Whether it's a booster, or a logistics, or even another dps ship, the average utility during the fight will lean in favor of the party with twice as many characters in play.

And don't tell me something like "well, you can just break free of the combat ship and engage the logistics," because if that was the case, then there'd be nothing to complain about in the first place; you could de-aggro from any fight, booster or otherwise. Keep all other factors constant in this equation.

You're not being very objective when you say something like "no risk." There is always risk, and in fact, pretty significant risk. If you can find it and shoot it, there's risk.

With regard to your idea: while it's noble, the only place where it's safer to boost in a safespot rather than at a gate/station/POS is high-sec, meaning that boosters are pretty easy to locate. But in high-sec, whether the booster is on-grid or not is hardly relevant.