These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at

EVE Information Portal

  • Topic is locked indefinitely.

Dev blog: Command Bursts and the New World of Fleet Boosting

First post First post
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#301 - 2016-08-29 21:33:03 UTC
Will the industrial cores work the same as they do now? What is the change from t1 to t2?

Maximze your Industry Potential! - Download EVE Isk per Hour!

Import CCP's SDE - EVE SDE Database Builder

Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#302 - 2016-08-29 21:38:57 UTC
On the mining boost changes, I think the biggest issue is that a rorqual or orca in a belt is generally a good way to lose it. I don't see how these new mods and boosts will change that.

Perhaps it's a good idea to now revert to the old system where upgrade and wormhole belts had to be scanned down? They would still be vulnerable but it lessens the high risk of going into siege mode with a rorqual in a belt (assuming they work the same), which is basically a free ship kill for any sizable fleet. Seriously, no one is going to use them in a belt unless you have some major changes coming up.

Maximze your Industry Potential! - Download EVE Isk per Hour!

Import CCP's SDE - EVE SDE Database Builder

Damocles Orindus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#303 - 2016-08-29 21:47:06 UTC
Daemun Khanid wrote:
Just put links on-grid and get rid of the need to assign boosters and call it good. I have to agree. All this buff timer/range/skill rework stuff is just silliness imo.

No need for new modules, no need to make command processors into rigs, no need for silly ass ammo or scripts. Just give them a 500k/m max range. They try to warp at range to stay safe and a single interceptor ruins their day. Links are vulnerable, job done.

This ^^.

This entire list of changes is greatly unnecessary and would have been better implemented first by just moving combat boosts to on-grid and keeping mining boosts as is.
Johiah Parmala
No Mercy For Percy
#304 - 2016-08-29 21:48:49 UTC
Ok, so I have seen quite a few badly formulated posts about why this is or isn't a good change. Time to make a well formulated post with both the pros and cons.
First of all, instead of an endless debate why not have a poll? Maybe a month after the release have people vote on whther they like it or not. If they don't like it, instead of moving back to the old system, Why not make a special forum section where people can post their ideas. Then for any ideas that gain traction you could then move similar ideas into a folder for that one idea. Eventually ideas would either be assimilated or die out, and you would end up with a few good ideas that people like. Ok, rant time.
Personally I do not like the change, however the old system was not balanced either.
Now, I am not a pvper so I will not have as much knowledge about that side of things, but I am an industrialist.
Pros of new system:
Stops off grid alts from boosting and being difficult to catch
Replaces an old broken system with a new broken system
Makes mining more difficult (Industry rant below)
Small gang pvp and solo pvp are now even harder
No skill refund
Forces people to buy skill extractors or just have a useless skill on an alt that was only around simply for the boosting

I may have missed some pros, if I did please point them out.

Ok, now industry rant.
First off, some of you may not know this but the economy is almost 100% player based. Like 99%
So what happens when you made the lucrative null sec mining more difficult, as difficult as it already is with simply having to haul the minerals to jita and risk losing it all and a jump freighter.
The result of this update will be fewer orcas. Null sec mining becomes harder. Orcas can no longer afk boost in hisec, even though they aren't in danger of being ganked. So now what happens is mining becomes slower, and the number of ships being blown up increases. So prices go up. Yay, right? No. Increased mineral prices may mean that mining wil stay the same, but pure industrialists will have a harder time making a profit. Not only that, but needing to make a profit then causes prices to rise. Now isk is even more inflated, even though there is not more isk in the game. So now everything is more expensive. Things blown up are harder to replace. This makes null mining even LESS profitable. So fewer again do it. Prices rise, titans and supercaps will be more reluctant to be used in fights, so less content. Now prices have stopped rising because industrialists start quitting. So more think "Hey, I can do that". Prices rise. Unless you make mining boosts not use ammo and be effective from 14.2 au away, all I just said WILL happen, and it will be the final nail in Eve's coffin. Make it so boosting isnt so easy and op, but not so difficult that it wrecks the delicate economic balance.
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#305 - 2016-08-29 21:59:05 UTC
Chris Kelvin wrote:
Huydo wrote:
It seems this game really wants that we get rid of it...

Yep. It's going to be really funny as they laugh at us and ask if they can have our stuff; right up until they start complaining about no content and no stupid minor or idiot industrialists to shoot at. I would like to ask Fozzie if he wants my stuff?
As somebody who has been on 1878 killmails of which only 9 have been industrials and 1 a mining barge I would say fewer miners/industrials in space wont effect my kills whatsoever. It would actually improve it, I suspect, because the folks who do hunt miners would have to come to null for content, where I can finally shoot them. Twisted
Dunk Dinkle
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
#306 - 2016-08-29 21:59:55 UTC
Overall, it's a good plan to get ships providing boosts into the fight.

I do hope you reconsider how you are handling Wing Command and Fleet Command skills.

Fleet Command is a 12x skill and required months of training. For a slight range increase of bursts, it's not an equitable trade-off for the sunk skill points.

For those of us that have Wing Command and Fleet Command on our mains, not low SP link alts, I hope you consider an alternative plan on how to handle these skills in the transition.

TK Corp
#307 - 2016-08-29 22:03:27 UTC
Johiah Parmala wrote:
Time to make a well formulated post with both the pros and cons.
First of all, instead of an endless debate why not have a poll?

Congratulations on contradicting yourself in immediately consecutive sentences.
Silven Rubis
The Initiative.
#308 - 2016-08-29 22:05:41 UTC
Daemun Khanid wrote:
Just put links on-grid and get rid of the need to assign boosters and call it good. I have to agree. All this buff timer/range/skill rework stuff is just silliness imo.

yo man +1
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#309 - 2016-08-29 22:06:01 UTC
Any consideration to allowing overheating for these modules? Could affect range, strength, duration, etc.
Arcturus Ursidae
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#310 - 2016-08-29 22:06:52 UTC
Overall I like the changes, there are some things that I would tweak.

So the scan res bonus for non-boosted fleets just goes, not sure that’s a bad thing but this means there are three skills for range boost? This seems high and skill point intensive now these are not really needed for supporting fleet numbers. The norm for skills is a single secondary specialisation, these bonus seem implemented because you weren’t sure what to do with the three skills. Leadership skill could remain the same or you could just scrap one skill.

Also the scan res bonus for fleeting is small but is at least something that encourages fleeting up, I would be unsure of the consequences for such a social game to remove that bonus. Same could be said for other passive bonuses in the various skills.

Others have done the maths the range seems a little short, it seems balanced around command ships and yet the blog talks about lower entry level and with the passive bonuses removed encouraging entry level boosters in fleets may be beneficial. I would like to see that range boosted up so command destroyers and combat battlecruisers don’t need to be right on top of the enemy, going from off grid to on grid is one thing but being right in the mix is a big step, I expect boosting ships to skirt the engagement, this forces an enemy to choose to go after them. 25-30km base at least is reasonable where most individuals can be expected not to have maxed the three skills for range.

Might be nice to increase potential choices to have strategic cruiser have more range than a command ship as it has lower bonuses.

There are perhaps some justified gripes about how these impact mining, not sure anyone ever really complained about off grid mining boosts. This could be mitigated a little by putting the base duration way up for mining boosts like 5 minutes plus at least. That would enable mining ships to move to and fro from an orca or rorqual. Again it creates a bit of usage choice play it safe lose a bit of time. For mining ships I feel the duration may trump area of affect in usage this may be the reverse of combat situations.

A comment was made about faction warfare plexes. There is perhaps a design choice here for these situations including PVE, some activities can be over very quickly, missions, incursion sites, small ship PVP, without acceleration gates cancelling these boosts off grid boosting lives and is in fact stronger as the target no longer has any basic fleet boosts, and it would appear that a ship could receive all combat boost types from very few boosting ships then warp to its target. Even if the boosts do not last the duration of a fight the effect could give an overpowered advantage.

Don’t want to come across as to negative, there are some great basic changes here and the capital mod change seems very interesting.
ugh zug
Gallente Federation
#311 - 2016-08-29 22:11:19 UTC
Oh hey look at that, i had a need for SP to liquidate and here comes ccp to save the day, by by booster alts. While it is good that you are balancing the game, you have waited so long to do anything about it. it's going to make many pounds of salts. Expect many leet pvprs and their power of 2 accounts to be canceled.

Invuln on the roq does not offset the risk of having it on the belt with the fleet. Hurry up with the cheapo industrial booster ship in the name of content.

Where's the rest of the citadels? I bet you had all the art assets already finished 6-9 months ago. Where's the insurance button and rookie ships on the current citadels? Where's the no bumping while tethered? Where's the assets list on the API for citadels? Stop playing with your cockroach rocket and vr headset, and deliver on promises made.

One final suggestion, seeing as how your overstaffed art department is doing nothing right now, you should consider having them redo carrier, fax, and super models. thanatos, ninazu, aeon, revenant should all be redone completely because they look like something that only a mother could love.

Want me to shut up? Remove content from my post,1B. Remove my content from a thread I have started 2B.

Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#312 - 2016-08-29 22:12:47 UTC

Just curious if your planing on changing the skill requirements to make it easier to get into the fleet boosting role (command battle cruiser and boosting skills) - which to some extent I can understand as it does take an extremely long time to train currently for both armor and shield command ships as well as the leadership skills - will there be some sort of reimbursement of skill points or anything for those of us who spent the time under the current system to train for it?? Or is the plan to just roll the skills over and that be it?

Golek Gaterau
#313 - 2016-08-29 22:14:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Golek Gaterau
Excellent changes - keep it up like this CCP.

Of course there will be some fine tuning, of that I am sure. The proposed ranges need practical testing with different fleet doctrines.

I would decrease boost effects in general - boostd stay immense powerful after the changes.

Also if a boost can become a negative number when the boost ends needs further clarification (armor boost cycle ends in 5% armor of a given fleet memberd ship, what happens?).

High sec boosting is a problem - I see the weapons timer is a trade off between mission booster and neutral third party booster. There will be no other solution as the weapons timer - sadly.

The idea with ammo for booster ins brilliant. It is only logical to change cloaks to ammo too.

The tears in this thread are absolute fantastic.

Every single page is worth reading. All the bears ranting about them having to take a risk - this is where broken game mechanics like OGB take the crowd of the entitled and the mental weak.
Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium
#314 - 2016-08-29 22:17:16 UTC  |  Edited by: TheSmokingHertog
"Tech 2 Command Bursts will require Leadership level 5 and their group specialist skill such as Armored Command Specialist (formerly known as Armored Warfare Specialist) level 1"

If you want it to be in line with other skills trees in game, this should be LVL IV, not LVL V.


Nice, I like the "ORE Mining Director Mindlink", what would be the price range?

"Dogma is kind of like quantum physics, observing the dogma state will change it." ~ CCP Prism X

"Schrödinger's Missile. I dig it." ~ Makari Aeron

-= "Brain in a Box on Singularity" - April 2015 =-

Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#315 - 2016-08-29 22:17:30 UTC
Daemun Khanid wrote:

It's not a question of being able to fly the ships but even if it were just because you had leadership V that doesn't mean you can fly a command ship. But more importantly someone who trained a skill that required no specific ship or module shouldn't be forced to fly a specific ship/module to get use out of a skill they trained without those restrictions. A person doesn't just train basic leadership skills so they can be a link pilot flying a t3 cruiser they train them so they can command small gangs and fleets and get bonuses no matter what ship they are flying. This change says "well, if you want to get anything out of the skills that you've already devoted time training then you will be a boost ship" or "you can pay us to extract your skills and you can put the sp towards something that you'll actually use."

If you can't figure out the analogy that's your intellectual deficiency and not my fault but I'll break it down for you anyway.
Player plays monthly fee which allows them to train a skill.
(Consumer buys a guy that drives just fine and runs on gas like any other)

After making your purchase CCP says sorry but that skill doesn't do that any more.
(Consumer is told they can't buy gas anymore)

CCP says BUT if you fly fleet boost focused ships and used fleet boost modules you'll still get use of your skills
(Car dealer says, you can drive your care on these special roads and it'll work just fine)

CCP says you can always buy extractors from us and redistribute your sp (Car dealer say, you can by this special upgrade and drive wherever you want)

Understand now? They sell you a product, then decide after the fact that the product you paid for is no longer going to perform the task that you intended it for when you paid for it. They then try to upsell you more products just so you can get the same benefit from your purchase that you already paid for. More commonly referred to as a scam.

Honestly it really doesn't effect me that much. I started training my link alt to be ongrid combat links back when the command dessi's were released because their creation was an obvious move in the direction of on grid links. It wasn't a matter of if boosts were going on grid it was just when. I extracted my leadership skills from my main and injected the sp into my combat links alt. So again, I planned ahead and don't really have anything to lose w these changes. That still doesn't make their approach to the skills and potential profit from extractors less shady.

Passive bonuses that apply all the time with no effort involved in applying them are exactly what CCP is trying to get rid of with these changes, its something thats been widely disliked for a long time by both players and devs. Yes that going to change how the skills apply in the game but guess what, you're not entitled to have your skills remain a certain way just because its what they were like when you trained them.

Should I complain that theres no longer just one skill for flying Battlecruisers despite it being that way when I trained for them? Should I complain that a lot of my skills have had their prerequisites reduced since I trained them, making them easier to get for others than they were for me?

And yes CCP are pushing skill extractors as a solution. Why? because thats what they were designed to do, to allow people to take skill points they either no longer want or no longer use and put them somewhere else. Yes they cost money but guess what again, CCP is a business not a charity and a business that doesnt try to make money is a business that doesnt last very long. I honestly struggle to see whats in any way shady about pushing a product that function as a direct address to an issue your customers have raised.

Finally I understood your analogy perfectly well, i just thought it was shite and being jaw droppingly condescending about it doesn't make me think its any less shite.

Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin

you're welcome

Helene Fidard
#316 - 2016-08-29 22:17:34 UTC
warfare links will rust upon the scrapheap of history

counterrevolutionaries will be reprocessed

Hey! I don't know about you

but I'm joining CTRL-Q

Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#317 - 2016-08-29 22:18:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Eli Stan
Dunk Dinkle wrote:
Overall, it's a good plan to get ships providing boosts into the fight.

I do hope you reconsider how you are handling Wing Command and Fleet Command skills.

Fleet Command is a 12x skill and required months of training. For a slight range increase of bursts, it's not an equitable trade-off for the sunk skill points.

For those of us that have Wing Command and Fleet Command on our mains, not low SP link alts, I hope you consider an alternative plan on how to handle these skills in the transition.

This parallels other skills. Small Hybrid Turret is a 1x skill that provides a 5% damage bonus per level to both blasters and rails. Small Blaster Specialization is a 3x skill that provides a 2% damage bonus to just rails. The intent is that a newish player can get pretty good pretty quickly, but only those truly dedicated to the specific aspect can maximize it. If you reserve the biggest bonus for the 12x skill, you create a disproportionately large skill gap between young and old characters.

I have several specialization skills trained, but not a single one of them to V.
Steroidastroid Ormand
#318 - 2016-08-29 22:21:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Steroidastroid Ormand
If I may suggest a simple and elegant solution:
You're comparing command bursts with smartbombs?
Then make exactly as smartbombs! Fittable to any ship! and leave a single one skill that affects them - burst range.
This is so radical that it's not even comparable to current mechanics. But more I think about it, better it seems.
Command ships? Leadership skills? passive bonuses? lots of CPU time to process it... This all is so redundant really

P.S. please, I realize that it's a total heresy, don't rage me Smile
P.P.S. I have a feeling that by creating all these complications DEVs just want to show us an illusion of work SmileSmile
#319 - 2016-08-29 22:23:19 UTC
Was wondering about something, since I recall that Fozzie wrote that people will only get weapon timers and no suspect timers.

Let's say you have two corps at war in highsec. Since the boosts are quite strong (which is fine), I suppose people will use neutral boosting alts in order to boost their fleet when fighting war targets. Since the alt is most likely in an NPC corp, and does not seem to get a suspect timer when providing boost, this means you get a 99% safe booster, that is only vulnerable to suicide ganking (which realistically won't be dealt with).

Is this working as intended?

The easy fix is just to have people get suspect timers as logi does. I was just wondering, since it has been stated that people won't get suspect timers.
Chris Kelvin
Pheonix Rising Corp
#320 - 2016-08-29 22:24:44 UTC
Daemun Khanid wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Vidork Drako wrote:
Its a very nice change because offgrid boost had no sense. Great job. Lol

Now a question who will come back again and again until we got an answer :

Q : Will you refund all SP currently allocated in Leadership skills?

Lets us know please. A simple yes or no will be enough.

No. The skills will all continue to exist (under slightly different names) and will impact the same type of gameplay, so there are no plans to refund any skills with this change.

Vidork Drako wrote:

Another question :
Q : I see you gave a weapon timer to booster, will they also receive a suspect time ?

Nope, just a weapons timer.

THAT is a total load of crap. Youre taking a passive bonus set of skills (a rather investment intensive set at that) and turning it into a set of skills that require active module usage to perform any function whatsoever. I would go out on a limb and say a MASSIVE percentage of the population has these skills trained at the moment and benefit from them and after these changes the vast majority of them will never see usage or benefit from these skills ever again. Could you try just a little bit harder to farm your players for $ from skill extractors because this move isn't obvious enough.

Just.... Thank you!!!