EVE General Discussion

1. That point alone just shows how OP links are, what exactly happens when you engage another small gang that has none? And small gangs was still lots of fun after quantum rise was implemented

2. I agree generally about force projection and I'd add that HP related sov objectives is also bad, but that's for another thread

3. Eve has always been good for under dogs and will remain to be




1. If a nerf to links happens, I think small gangs needs to be hurt as hard as fleets, if fleets stop using links as a whole, then it will just make small gang pvpers think that links are even more mandatory than what they already are, since that notion would make it seem they're catered for small gangs over fleets

2. I don't think large fleets needs to be treated any differently than small gangs

3. doesn't do enough



Some people could say the same about prenerf titans

So it seems clear any discussion of links needs to separate the local active tanking ones from the skirmish ones.

How about making the bonus to local tanking stronger than the bonus to RR modules? Favouring the few over those who bring logi.

And has anyone mentioned lol Info links at all yet? They in no way need nerfing afaik.
(I wonder if it's becoming clearer that some racial EWAR & link bonuses need swapping about, perhaps Gal + webs, maybe combined with a change to the bonus to make it to web strength instead? Having both bonused point and web range would of course be OP. Min can still racially benefit from bonus painters & damps and have their natural speed.)

Also, Garmon, you say on-grid links would be used, but is that because everyone's expected to have tacticals on every gate, or because many T3 link fits can be cap-strong/stable while mwding to keep safe? And do you factor in probing to this? Wouldn't any link ship be able to be probed in ~10seconds if on-grid? Would this indeed actually be that terrible, to encourage more pilots to go for cov-ops/scanning T3 ships? Or would you just have, as standard, combat probe launchers on things like certain capable/OP link T3s and Scimitars&recons?

Sorry I'd edited a fair bit while you replied.

Would not a claymore have huge problems in keeping alive with any gang jumping into another, or even just warping to something with bubbles? T3s can of course be fit to ignore bubbles and get to tacticals, which again is using range control as a tank. A claymore/CS is a slow fat brick with minimal active tanking potential vs several hostiles. It's going to have to try make it back to a gate and never aggress, and jump soon after being shot as far as I see it.

Well this is the links thread, what's to be done about Info links?

As for directly buffing active tanking, it would be very harsh to players to nerf links first, and then sort such tanking down the line. They'd have to go with a much reduced/removed niche until such a change. Even 3-6months is a lot and would put people off of playing or skilling for such ships. Consider the noobs & RPers/non-nano-fags! I mean, the sandbox.

Indeed.

If Garmon pushes for something, it's probably because he knows everything about that particular thing, and I trust him on whatever gameplay changes he proposes (The ones regarding small gang PVP, as it's what he is the best at, who would ask Garmon about 0.0 Sov Warfare).

But do these people need to have their lives made any harder? You may have the isk and had the fun of many of such ships, but others are still being inspired, bearing away for that first link T3, training their alt 1 racial set at a time, and could well expect at least some reimbursement or incentive to keep playing should such links suddenly be swept out from under them. Yes adapt or die, but these aren't the blobbers we're talking about here, it's the underdogs going for pilot skill. Again, you've said this is one of the most fun ways to fly.

Gang-linked frigates does seem rather nuts. But surely you're giving up many of the advantages of a frigate to be tied to a slower moving ship? I would have thought a frig could rather easily evade another while checking for links. Yes it's a waste of their time to have to do this and move on instead. Again is it just skirmish links that are the real problem, allowing far too much range control to force an unmatched fight?

Pretty good OP, Garmon, I just want to point out that you need to take Command Ships into the equation as well.

I know you are talking about links themselves, but you specificly mention the swiss armor scout/link t3, there's also command ships who currently are not used at all because of t3's.

I agree with you that the power of the links is quite strong and a major force multiplier. Tuning them down is desireable. At the same time tho, tuning down the links (or link bonus, whichever way you go about it), make sure the Command Ships at least get stronger than the t3's. It has to be mentioned. For example, my CEO is a CS 5 maxed out leadership pilot who actually wants to be on-grid, fighting in a CS but with links running. He is really annoyed over the situation that people uses t3 alts, when there's pilots like him who had the intation to be on-grid fighters with the bonuses, and they had that very intention at creation five-ten years ago.

I.e. make the Command Ship links stronger than the t3's, but make sure the CS also have the on-grid combat role. Let t3's be the alt links at SS/POS, but with weaker links. This makes for options for people to either run weaker link/scout, or a stronger link (but that puts them on-grid). Perhaps even make the links give extended power to ships that are within, say, 249km (max lock range).

Yah, that benefit blobs, but it also works with the "with risk comes reward", i.e. you stay on grid. And it also promotes the actual mains and command ship trained pilots, rather than alts.

Doesn't that give me more credibility?

quiet you worthless incursion bear

My biggest issue with Ganglinks and the Offgrid issue is as follows ::

IT REQUIRES YOU TO HAVE AN ALT CHARACTER TO RUN IT!!

No LIVING player wants to sit at a safespot while doing absolutely nothing.


When you're ON GRID then you can become a target, you also have to be involved with what's going on, if you're a kite fleet you have to be watching the situation, also - the sacrifice to capability makes them soft targets, forcing them to sacrifice ganglinks/command processors for tanking ability - meaning they can't pimp it out as much or as expensively.

I think the argument that some T3s say "Well, it's impossible to bring a command link tengu to a fight because they're too soft!" - NO, YOU are making them too soft because you INSIST on putting 5 ganglinks out there on ONE ship and then ***** about your OWN decision making.;


Another easy fix ::
Just allow only one command processor to be added. You can't put 4 command processors.

That would fix most of these issues because then you need 3-5 ships to add 5 links, not just 1 ship. Most of the links are powerful in coordination, not alone.


Also, Field command ships should become more like Marauders with their bonuses.

Allow them to only field 4 weapon systems, 3 gang links, and double bonus on the 4 weapon systems. Readjust the CPU/PG of course, and then you have something that is actually not sacrificing itself to be effective on the field.


Finally - The volume of bonus should probably be revisited. Instead of 2% to start on a ganglink. Refactor the whole numbers so you get a dimishing return as you get more. So you start with a 15% bonus base, then you get less bonuses as you get up until you top out around 25% bonuses as you get your skills maxed out.

I think its just the t3 thats overpowered so that could be fixed So command ships are superior but there could be another way. They are still vulnerable when changing systems. how about a significant passive visual effect if links are fitted. Make it risky to fly t3 links. Blow up sig radius so its fast to lock, change sensor strength so its easy to probe out

It seems most people don't know how boosts work either and it also seems like I have things to learn yet but everybody talks about the 25% versus 15 % on t3 versus command but thats a small part of the whole boost computation. From what I can tell, after everything is done on a shield hardening boost the difference amounts to only a few percent of hardness. like 32 versus 35, am i wrong? I keep thinking I missed something on the numbers. Its like adding an extra invuln

The first thing I would look at about active tanking would be cap recharge rate. It seems this would free slots, extend tanking time and increase hardness. Neuts would have to work harder but it seems they have some extra capacity already. They could boost recharge up to the predicted neuting rates

While we're on to active tanks. Shield and armor could be balance a little bit by resolution boosts on typically armor turrets. There is no mechanic in game to adjust resolution. shield are usually larger. boosting res would increase hit chance against shield targets while leaving low sigs like armor barely changed. Could make up for lack of damage types somewhat also

DPS DPS buff nerf buff nerf. COme on!, were smarter than this.