Warfare & Tactics

I find it kind of silly that they blame links for the decline of the game. Must be links, has to be.

It's not like it could possibly be that people left when you couldn't go anywhere in anything bigger than a destroyer without getting hotdropped.

It's not like it could possibly be people getting tired of blob warfare and moving onto other games where a single player matters more.

It's not like it could possibly be people leaving because the number one way to play eve for years was sitting on a titan for eons waiting for someone to light a cyno somewhere so you could jump in and gank a condor with your 50 man gang, and then that playstyle got nerfed.

It's not like it could possibly be people not joining/staying because of the illusion that skillpoints are everything. Why bother joining a game that some people have been playing for over a decade if you can never catch up.

It's not like it could possibly be people leaving because of a spike in suicide ganks in carebearland.

It's not like it could possibly be people leaving because fozziesov.

---

It took a long time for some pretty basic **** to get fixed. A lot of that did get mostly fixed, but at what cost?

But wait no, must be the links. Something anybody that's willing to fire up another account or use an existing alt account could have.

Except that making boosts AOE will further strengthen the blob while many boosting chars will be out of a role. This will evidently lead to chars unsubbing.

Beyond a few anecdotes, it has not been established that boosing alts, or alts in general have any significant negative affect on sub levels.

Concurrent user rates were steady or rising year on year for many years after boosts were introduced. The downward trend seems to have started after certain other more recent developments that effected the core aspects of manufacturing and bloc level content.

My argument is against the assertion that changing current mechanics to seem fairer will result in more people joining and sticking with the game. The facts seem to be that as alienated old guard leave the game, the huge influx of new players to replace them is predictably absent.

The space submarine point and click RPG drama llama market is already tapped.

this is how this scenario will turn out the blob will have more logi and keep thier booster alive, the little gang will have thier booster raped and the big guy will win. stop thinking from a solo pov and start thinking bout gangs. i have a booster and honestly think the best way to solve them is get rid of them all together.

TLDR:- Facing a big gangs booster on grid will be actually harder than probing and killing or command destroyer jumping and killing ogb ones

I personally would love to see more command ships on the field. The MJD generator needs a slightly longer spool up time (1+ second for sure) and higher fitting PG to at least 20-25, imo.

Gangs, boosted or not, would probably turn a fight in their favor with more numbers anyway. Bring a rapier and increase your obit ranges to minimize the number of relocated pilots. Have more anchor pilots.

Did these changes actually happen already?

Yeah true. When you said "I have a booster and honestly think the best way to solve them is get rid of them all together", I actually misunderstood what you meant and assumed you were implying something else.

Anyway, I've said before that removing links all together would be the simplest and best way to fix them but I really disagree with that now. Aside from being a really messy idea in general, it just won't happen, for many reasons.

Removing off grid links, however, and turning on grid or AOE links into a legitimate, interactive ship class, is a great idea because it will bring an end to a lot of the "AFK" off grid boosting alts and promote the active participation of fleet boosters, and it will even benefit solo and even small gang players because if the links are on grid they will know instantly if any of their enemies have them, and they'll be easier to separate because instead of just having to be in the same system the links also have to be within a certain range on grid.

Lazy and bad pilots will complain that their links will get shot down, but really, what kind of a complaint is that? "We can't put links on grid, are you nuts? They'll get shot down!" Well yeah, that's what happens, especially when you're using an AFK alt for the job of a fleet support ship. Adapt or die.

Yeah, I just used the term "AFK" because that's the generally understood term that people use even though it's wrong, and I was worried that Dr darkside would not understand me if I used a different term.

You can replace "AFK" with "non-piloted, inactive alt", and the point is valid. Proper AOE links would bring an end to this type of gameplay. And those players who choose to do the same thing with AOE links would now have to put them at the same risk as other non-piloted inactive alts like logi and falcons.

Links are going to get rebalanced so it should be obvious that ships that use links will also most likely get rebalanced. So if links are on grid AOE then T3s will most likely be balanced accordingly. I don't know what your blobbing and thinking you're good has to do with it, but if that's your way of adapting then good on you.

Can you explain how a 6000km AOE means that people inside plexes can't have boosts? The only way this is so is if it is specifically intended to be so, in which case it is not a consequence of AOE boosts but a purposeful denial of links in plexes.

And can you explain how destroying an enemy fleet's booster to win the battle is any different from destroying their logi to win a battle, and explain why it's bad? You make it sound so easy too. "Everyone just shoot the booster and we'll win!" With that kind of simple-minded strategy I'd say you're really likely to lose more than anything. Did you forget the logi can rep the command ship too?



These two statements seem really contradictory. If it's the same gameplay then how is it a scenario where one side can have boosts and the other can't? If you're talking about links not being allowed in plexes, I've already covered that, correct me if I'm wrong.

And what about gatecamps? I thought gatecamps were still a huge part of the game. I run into gatecamps all over the place, but mostly in null sec. But there's nothing wrong with gatecamps anyway.

Also, links are COMPLETELY pay-to-win, they're like the definition of pay-to-win. You pay for the extra account and you get increased ship stats across the board. How is that not pay-to-win?

By the way, I've been playing since 2006 so I think I actually qualify as old guard, not that it really matters.

So you want evenly matched battles, like in call of duty?

I agree, but I am still not entirely against the idea of some kind of CONCORD-sanctioned battle arena. If it was done right it would bring lots of content and entertainment. It would have to be restricted to a specific group of high-sec systems to work properly, to keep it spectacular, like an exhibition or something. Gambling could be encouraged. It could even be integrated into the war-dec system. For instance, if both parties agreed to settle the war over a duel. This would make sense, since CONCORD sanctions all war-decs as well, correct me if I'm wrong.

It is worth considering, at least. But even if it were to be done, it should not be for a long time because it is just too unimportant to take it off the back burner.

Yeah, I guess so. Never really thought of it like that.