Ships & Modules

I stopped paying attention here.

You kinda missed the part that T3's plus subs are way more expensive than CS's. You also missed out the part about SP loss if one goes boom.

Makes me wonder how many PvP fleets you've actually been in with link support?

CS's in a proper PvP fleet will always have a place as they can still fit a decent tank and have better survivability on the field than T3's do.

How about as a simple fix to the issue of boosting off/on grid, it would still give the current boosts off grid but those boosts would be increased if the CS was on grid?

That way, the CS can still support a system but can be brought into a fight to focus the effectiveness of fleet in a specific area.

you can fit more links to a CS. something like 6 vs 4 on t3. sometimes another bonus is better than 2% on 3 other bonuses.

Commad Ships require tons of training only if you train for one bonus. If you want to "catch them all" T3 require more skillpoints.

Switching boosts to ongrid will make the t3 boosting sub useless.

It will have a worse tank than the command ships since the link sub has no resist or buffer bonuses.

Fleet Command Ships (Vulture, Damnation, Claymore, Eos) are only useful for offensive actions where you expect to jump into the enemy with them already on grid. For all other gang boosting purposes you are better off with T3s. As to Field Commands - they occupy a nice middle area between T1 BCs and T3s... though they're a lot closer to T1 BC than T3. IMO their bang for the buck is quite low.

Bacically - Command Ships aren't quite obsolete, but they're very very close.

-Liang

Ed: Full Disclosure. I have Command Ships 5 trained on three characters and can fly all 4 races with great skills.

No it wouldn't. It would make multiple link T3s useless. A T3s single better boost would have a place in the fleet structure. Its single link would not require any gimping of its tank. On-grid only boosting would actually diversify fleets and make both ships types more important and both used within the fleet.

Fleet command ships are still used as was mentioned by attackers in large fleet actions. Jumping into a system with blobbed gates, or lag on titan bridging after the cyno opens can get a gimped T3 killed. If you look at killboards fleet commands are still used, but a defender with a pos'd up T3 is a stupid mechanic.

In high sec having T3 alts with not much leadership trained (as in wing command or fleet command levels) for vanguard fleets is real let down for folks having trained fleet command ships and those leadership skills. Also, a change to on-grid only boosting would reduce the total dps of vanguard fleets which would increase the completion times and reduce the flow of the isk faucet that is high sec incursions. If those fleets want the links they would have to bring the ship into the site with them.

I think some of the misunderstanding and name-calling at Tipia was because the poster was talking about incursions and Tipia wasn't. Regardless the idea of an off-grid booster is bad game design. Having a totally safe or nearly so important ship such as a fleet booster is allowing less swing in the progress of a battle. Having boosters on grid means they become a possible target, and their loss will be felt. Granted fleet commands are tough nuts to crack as they should be. A one link T3 can be as well if it focusses on tank and not command processors and co-pros.

When you fly a fleet command your fit is centered around your links and tank. Your weapons are next to meaningless. At best small weapons to try to kill or shake a frig tackler. T3s can be set up the same way. After you have fit your 3 links on the FC or 1 link on the T3 you devote grid and/or cpu to tanking (or in the case of a Claymore possibly some agility/speed as well). Eos, I would assume to be the same but I have no experience with it (that has to be one of the rarest used ships in the game, heh).

Field commands have also had their utility diminished by T3s as wel, although not as muchl. But that could not be fixed by on-grid boosting. An Absolution can still favorably compare to a Legion, a Sleipnir to a Loki, a . . . well not so much a Nighthawk to a Tengu (Tengu being such an op ship imo, or in some folks opinion a NH needing an offensive buff). Interesting thing about that any buff to a Nighthawk would have to be done so that it only could be used offensively otherwise bears will just use any buff to increase an already incredible and possibly op tank. I have no experience or knowledge of the Astarte v Proteus.

Commands are not entirely obsolete. But they are near obsolete, due to T3s. Fat chance of nerfing T3 most likely. SO the only thing that can be done by those that want to restore command ships imo is keep requesting on-grid only boosting, to help fleet commands, and maybe some buffs to field commands.

Warfare processor sub replaces the resist, buffer or active tanking subsystem.

Tech 3 boosting ships are pretty balanced I'd say.
Agreeing with many if not most of the points made in favor of this

Tech 3:

Pros:

• Bigger boost bonus
• Easier to train for
• can cloak
• can get away from bubbles

Cons:

• can't survive on the field
• Not Immune outside of a POS anymore
• Adds No DPS to your gang
• No kill mails (if that matters to you)

Fleet Command Ships:

Pros:

• Stays with the fleet, and lives.
• Adds some extra DPS to your fleet
• 1 skill book unlocks all Command Ships
• Kill Mail whoring (again, if that matters)
• can fit more links without gimping your ship

Cons:

• Not as much DPS as a field command, but its meant to link, not gank.
• can't scout, cloak, run away.
• Weaker bonus
• No hiding what kind of ship you are, maybe more likely to get primaried faster?

Did I miss anything?