navyships

“A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.”

– Laozi

For Odyssey 1.1. we’re going to be taking a swing at aspects of our warfare link features, as well as rebalancing command ships. We believe that the package of changes we’ve put together will be a significant step forward for the game, but it’s definitely not the end of iteration on these features.

For years one of the most hotly discussed issues surrounding warfare links is their ability to apply bonuses to fleet members anywhere in the same solar system. We will not be changing this aspect of the feature in Odyssey 1.1. There are some serious technical hurdles to adjusting this aspect of the features, which are being worked on as we speak but for which we are not currently ready to announce an ETA.

What we will be changing for 1.1 is:
The strength of the bonuses provided by Warfare links
The way that skills, ship bonuses and implants affect the strength of warfare bonuses
The specific types of bonuses provided by the Information Warfare mindlink and Information Wafare: Sensor Integrity warfare link
The method by which mindlink implants can be obtained
The fitting requirements of warfare link modules, and their use within starbase forcefields
Many aspects of Command Ship balance, including what bonuses they receive to warfare link strength
The base rep amount of all armor repairers and most shield boosters

I’m going to split our changes into three threads for 1.1 and one for a discussion of graphical model changes that will not be implemented in 1.1. but may come later this year. This thread will cover the changes to warfare link modules, bonuses, and effects, including the changes to mindlinks and strategic cruiser Warfare Processor subsystems.

The other threads are (hyperlinks to come):
Command Ship Balancing
Local armor and shield rep changes
Command Ship model changes

Let’s start with some changes to the warfare link modules themselves:

Warfare links (other than mining links) can no longer be activated inside a starbase forcefield
People can still orbit just outside the forcefield I know, but they will at least have to keep an eye on that character so it’s an improvement.

Powergrid need of all warfare links modules decreased by 100.
This goes alongside the balance changes to command ships, battlecruisers and strategic cruisers. We want to be able to balance a ship’s fittings such that fitting choices allow people different tradeoffs for the choice of what to do with their unbonused “utility” highslots. Some may want to leave it empty or go with a small neut, some may want to fit a gang link fore 100 or 110 pwg, some may want to go with a medium neut at 175 pwg. All of those choices provide different benefits and will require different sacrifices.

Quick mention of the changes to Strategic Cruiser Warfare Processor subsystems:

The Warfare Processors will now provide a 2% increase in the strength of warfare links per level of their racial defensive subsystem skill. They will also now provide bonuses to three different types of gang links:
Loki: Siege, Armored, Skirmish
Proteus: Armored, Skirmish, Information
Tengu: Siege, Skirmish, Information
Legion: Armored, Skirmish, Information

Next we’ll cover the changes to the link bonuses themselves.
In 1.1 some links will be getting reductions in their maximum possible strength (although none of them are dropping below the maximum levels that were possible before the introduction of Strategic cruisers and Tech Two links). We are also smoothing out the advancement path for gang boosting gameplay, making the base links stronger and reducing the effect of the modifiers on that strength. This will make the training path for gang boosting more of a slope and less of a cliff.

Our changes to the modifiers to warfare link strength are:
The four Warfare Specialist skill bonus changed from the current 100% bonus per level (after the first level) to 20% bonus per level.
Mindlink bonus reduced from +50% to +25%
T3 Warfare processor subsystem bonus changed to 2% per level. Command Ship link bonuses changed to a static 15% bonus. Orcas and Active Core Rorquals keep their 3% and 10% bonuses respectively.

And below you will find the changes to the base strength of each warfare link, including the maximum available boost (with all skills and the mindlink and maximum ship bonuses) both before and after the patch.

All defensive (Siege and Armored) links:
T1: 4.8%
T2: 6%
Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 25.9%
Former max bonus: 35%

Information Warfare: Electronic Superiority bonuses to ECM and Target Painters:
T1: 6.4%
T2: 8%
Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 34.5%
Former max bonus: 35%

Information Warfare: Electronic Superiority bonuses to Tracking Disruptors and Sensor Damps:
T1: 4%
T2: 5%
Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 21.5%
Former max bonus: 21%

Information Warfare: Recon Operation:
T1: 6.4%
T2: 8%
Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 34.5%
Former max bonus: 35%

Information Warfare: Sensor Integrity:
T1: 9.6%
T2: 12%
Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 51.75%
Former max bonus: 53%

Skirmish Warfare: Evasive Maneuvers:
T1: 6.4%
T2: 8%
Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 34.5%
Former max bonus: 35%

Skirmish Warfare: Interdiction Maneuvers:
T1: 7.2%
T2: 9%
Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 38.8%
Former max bonus: 53%

Skirmish Warfare: Rapid Deployment:
T1: 5.6%
T2: 7%
Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 30.2%
Former max bonus: 35%

Mining Foreman: Laser Optimization and Harvester Capacitor
T1: 5%
T2: 7.5%
Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 42.2%
Former max bonus: 42.2%

Mining Foreman: Field Enhancement
T1: 13.6%
T2: 17%
Max bonus per link with all modifiers: 95.7%
Former max bonus: 95%

We are also making some changes to the specific bonuses from the Information Warfare Skill, Information Warfare Mindlink and the Information Warfare: Sensor Integrity link:
The Info Warfare skill and mindlink will now give a bonus to scan resolution instead of lock range
Information Warfare: Sensor Integrity link will provide its bonus to both sensor strength and lock range.

We are planning to extend the bonuses from the defensive gang links to local capital repair modules.

And finally we’re making some significant changes to the availability of mindlink implants:
Adding normal T2 mindlinks (including mining mindlinks) to the Concord LP store for 20,000 Concord LP and 20m isk (~60-80m final product sale price).
Adding Navy Mindlinks with the 25% bonus to two different disciplines at once (matching racial command ship bonuses) to the normal racial LP stores at 150,000 LP and 50m isk (~200m isk final product sale price).

Links at the top lead to the threads for Command Ship and local repair module changes, and we’re very interested to hear your feedback on these changes in the thread below.

[ Original Dev Post ]

45 Comments

  1. Meh

    So carebears can still boost risk-free? And they don’t get their boosts nerfed?

    August 1, 2013 at 6:59 pm Reply
    1. Playos

      ya, cause orbiting a POS in a rorqual is totally the same risk as orbiting in a T3 cruiser or command ship.

      August 1, 2013 at 10:48 pm Reply
    2. nullbear#4901018439

      The difference is that the combat boosters have a reasonable chance of defending themselves or running. The sieged rorqual, outside the POS, cant warp or burn back inside the POS, and will be dumpstered by a couple dreads in less than a single cycle. Along with that, said rorqual cant reasonably compress ore away from the storage arrays.

      I’ve been saying for quite some time that the boosting rorqual should be in the belt with the miners, but it needs to have a reasonable chance of survival. Otherwise rorquals will only be used for compression.

      August 2, 2013 at 2:50 am Reply
  2. meh.....

    what is this shit ? Why do bonus ships gets nerfed so badly ?

    August 1, 2013 at 7:36 pm Reply
    1. Billbo

      Because the crying lowsec pubbies were calling for it

      August 1, 2013 at 10:22 pm Reply
  3. Kah'Roor

    Thank god they saved the mining boost, I would hate to think CCP would cut into the profit margins of 15 account high sec IS boxers (or just plain bots). The small gang guys trying to hold a peice of NPC Null or Low Sec, screw them and the 9 months they spent training up this stuff.

    August 1, 2013 at 7:43 pm Reply
    1. Playos

      Cause the mining boosts have dick to do with it?

      More minerals, cheaper ships, more combat… plain and simple.

      August 1, 2013 at 7:45 pm Reply
      1. Kah'Roor

        Oh yeah, your right everything has been getting cheaper. Finally, someone has recognized that industrialist are conflict drivers.

        August 1, 2013 at 8:00 pm Reply
        1. Playos

          Can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not… You think Goons invaded Fountain cause they wanted the ratting space? What do you think all that R64 moon goo is for?

          Would nerfing mining income (which max out at 50m/hour/toon generally) help anyone in anyway? Not that it would actually nerf incomes completely, minerals would just get more expensive.

          August 1, 2013 at 9:18 pm Reply
          1. Kah'Roor

            Moon goo has nothing to do with mind links (obviously). What I’m on about is why nerf the ones used by people that are blowing up ships and creating content while leaving the carebear links alone? I wouldn’t (and don’t really) give a rats ass about what they do to bear links if they left the real ones alone.

            August 1, 2013 at 9:48 pm
          2. Anhenka

            Because nobody was whining about the carebear ones on the basis of nobody caring if miners have higher yield.

            Why the hell would they go “Why don’t we go dick the links everybody is happy with and ignore the ones lots of people (including CCP) agree are imbalanced!”

            I don’t think “Hell we are nerfing these OP links, might as well fuck over the balanced ones as well” is a good game design choice.

            August 1, 2013 at 10:01 pm
          3. Playos

            And my point is that if you think miners and production guys don’t create content, you’re just being a fighter jock dick. Moon goo is entirely the province of industrialists, guys building shit… and the goo is worthless without the rocks and PI also involved.

            There is no rational argument for “lowering yields = more PvP” you won’t convince miners to strap on guns with lower income or more expensive ships… unless it’s to go ratting or missioning… which is at the end of the day, exactly the same shit… target, harvest, sell.

            August 1, 2013 at 10:41 pm
          4. nullbear#4901018439

            they are leaving the mining links alone for now, because they need to make sieging a rorqual outside a pos viable before they can fix the link.

            you go ahead and try sieging it outside the pos in current game mechanics, we’ll all be LOLing at you on evekill within a month at the most

            August 2, 2013 at 2:41 am
    2. Devore

      Because mining boosts have nothing to do with combat.

      And of course, nerfed mining volume will totally tank mineral prices and reduce the income of miners, and teach them carebears a lesson, right? Come on, think beyond the first step of the consequence chain.

      August 2, 2013 at 3:25 am Reply
  4. BOOO

    as someone who trained to be able to use perfect t2 links with the mind link this is a bunch of bull. there is nothing broken when everyone can train the same skills to get the same bonuses. and anyone who was crying should not be playing eve in the 1st place.

    August 1, 2013 at 11:37 pm Reply
    1. exNortherner

      You’re totally missing the point of this nerf and the changes that are still to come and have been adressed at Fanfest.
      This nerf is minute and nobody argues that everyone should still be able to bring links to a fight.

      It’s just that flying links is a purely passive, risk-free and boring duty that’s exclusively being done AFK by alts. The inevitable On-grid boosters will be more risky, yet more fair.
      Not to mention more interesting to fly, which should be especially rewarding for someone who trained them as much as you, shouldn’t it?

      August 2, 2013 at 1:42 am Reply
      1. per2

        they want on-grid booster, but its not so easy to implement what i have read .. something with jita was mentioned there aswell with this problem

        August 2, 2013 at 9:42 am Reply
  5. Rhoaden

    Some one smart please work out how much you lose post patch with the buff to repper and nerf to links

    August 2, 2013 at 12:41 am Reply
  6. 0z0ned

    WTT: boost loki for boost tengu

    August 2, 2013 at 2:49 am Reply
  7. Nearly had Enough

    In keeping with most Fozzies changes this year, this one delivers no less in terms of screwing Eve.
    Why why why ?? Bonus’s to 3 types of gang links ?? wtf.

    Fozzie your an idiot.
    Instead of fixing the existing roles you have just made everything bland.

    August 2, 2013 at 7:26 am Reply
  8. me

    Well, I’ll have to cancel my off grid boosting account, cause I can’t handle everything on grid/out of POS shields! You CCCP!!11!!

    August 2, 2013 at 7:42 am Reply
    1. System

      YEAH!!!!

      August 2, 2013 at 8:42 am Reply
  9. blubblub

    do i read that correct? i´m not sure, does the mining foreman mindlink II comes into concord LP store for 20k concord LP + 20mill isk? instead of the few missions you can get them right now and lowering the price for it from 1bill to 60mill? my friend who just bought one will go nuts^^

    August 2, 2013 at 8:55 am Reply
  10. Fuckuccp

    You fuckers CCP! Everything I have just spent months training for is wasted!

    August 2, 2013 at 11:32 am Reply
    1. Meh

      I would doubt very much your time was wasted. All your skills are still viable you just use them in a different way or with a different purpose. Or just start training your alt for another purpose.

      They have been saying that this was going to happen for months so in all fairness you we’re wasting your time with the foreknowledge that this was going to happen. So then my question becomes why if you knew this was coming did you train your alt so specifically?

      August 2, 2013 at 1:23 pm Reply
  11. CCP are dumb

    LOL CCP is looking to increase income not lose it. So how many alt boosting accounts do you think they will lose now ? Honestly i just don’t get it , yes everyone hates link’s but its doesnt stop most training an alt so they to can have off grid boosts. CCP shot self in foot again. Grats

    August 2, 2013 at 11:41 am Reply
    1. Meh

      Meh people will just re-spec the alts for something else. I know I will, always felt like I was cheating using it in that manner anyways.

      August 2, 2013 at 1:20 pm Reply
  12. good riddance

    Fuck off grid boosting. You want an advantage? Well take the risk too. You fucking pussies cant deal with being on a level playing field with others. If you have played eve long enough to have a booster alt you probably have sufficient skills to fly most ships well enough on your main to not need boosts. Secondly this change will actually flesh out the purpose of command ships. Now you’re going to want something that doesn’t sacrifice tank for links on field. Good riddance to all who leave because of this much needed change, CCP doesn’t need your money with all the influx of new people that happened recently. You won’t be missed, take your cheap off grid/in-shield boosts back to some other poorly thought out game. BRING SOLO BACK

    August 2, 2013 at 12:48 pm Reply
    1. blubblub

      tbh, the changes are not so big, and if someone really quits eve because of that, then well he might should´ve stopped long time ago.

      August 2, 2013 at 12:50 pm Reply
    2. Not much of a "nerf"

      These changes are minimal. The lack of being in a pos will just mean more people actually buy an account with a ogb.

      August 2, 2013 at 1:05 pm Reply
    3. alpha

      Offgrid boosting gives advantage to strategy and homefield players. You should have to prove yourself better to take somebody in their own system.

      August 2, 2013 at 1:25 pm Reply
      1. Dude...

        Dude… It’s not hard moving a 4.1 second-to-align covert-ops cloaking strategic cruiser, to any system.

        August 2, 2013 at 1:28 pm Reply
  13. Meh

    I don’t get what all the hub-bub is about. These are changes that we’re asked for by the community. The devs let us know months ago that this was coming. So you literally had months to prepare. Why are you paying/plexing an account that literally does one thing in a game like EVE?

    One of the greatest abilities of humankind is too adapt to change. Stop complaining and begin the adaption process.

    We’ve all played games before that get balances to classes/weapons/ships and so forth why is it everytime there is a change people whine like a two year old that just had their toys taken away?

    August 2, 2013 at 1:29 pm Reply
    1. Noisrevbus

      If you haven’t figured it out yet, the “adaption” here is: get more dudes, fly bigger ships or act in a social-contract environment where the others are not allowed to have more dudes or bigger ships.

      If you stop looking at how your immidiate environment use these ships today, look at the mechanics involved or “how the ships could potentially be used” you might be able to understand the frustrations. If you do that you’ll realize how poor of a change this is for EVE. For your immidiate environment, perhaps it’s not … but for your ability to ever get out of that environment and find diverse content it’s another story.

      Hopefully, you as a player will earn more skillpoints, experience and other things that let you think outside of your current box.

      August 2, 2013 at 1:48 pm Reply
      1. dafq

        You might be the one stuck in a box … i suggest you take your own advice and look past ” your immidiate environment use these ships today”.

        August 2, 2013 at 4:46 pm Reply
        1. Noisrevbus

          Tell me what adaption you’d suggest instead of just pulling a lazy “no u”. I’ve already given you a perfectly logical explanation of what adjustments these changes will set in motion. If you disagree with it, argue the points raised: the stronger bonus being shifted to a larger, slower and tanky ship from a smaller, faster and/or cloaky ship – which will lead to a further profileration of large gangs, large ships and social contracts (“we won’t fight you if you bring X”).

          Humor me, instead of pressing your back firmly against the wall with a cheap blanket comeback.

          August 3, 2013 at 2:33 am Reply
          1. dafq

            These ajustments will make it easy for small gangs to roam around with links and several different type of the w/o compleatly gimping dps. These ajustment will have huge impact on capital warfare and will allow small and medium sized groups to deploy blap dreds and triage better than they used to. These ajustments will make for some nice pirating both in low and high sec… well i guess the downside will be that you are no longer considered pro pvp for spending the time or isk for a boosting alt, as it was with falcons and neutral reping before that :) But feel free to tell me how after losing 2% resist after all the stacking penalties will change the way you fight? Why do all you ppl just look at what you can’t do anymore and dont think what new can you do?

            P.S. I dont go anywhere without at least 2 boosting t3s and i own 4 toons mostly for that. So tell me how you trainerd 2 months or how hard your corp will get hit by that “nerf”.. so back to my 1st answer.. pls get out of any box or closet you might be stuck in :)

            August 3, 2013 at 6:08 am
          2. Noisrevbus

            It’s still just blanket statements there buddy, you’re just throwing out random comments that are not rooted in the changes at hand: “These changes will make pigs fly” – It’s missing a How.

            My gripe have nothing to do with losing resists. My gripe have to do with the slower and larger ship (CS) getting the higher bonus, leaving the smaller, faster ship (T3) trailing behind. The premise is that anything slow, large and tanky inherently favour a larger group with larger ships.

            The issue at hand is that a smaller group can’t reasonably assume to tank a larger group anymore, the way that the game has scaled. This change, along with the other changes it’s grouped with, focus on tanking and assume that it’s a factor while in most situations these days, it’s not.
            Whatever improvement to damage you celebrate is absolutely irrelevant in any scenario that involve dealing with a larger gate-camp or randomly crashing into a larger roaming group. There is no magical way to thread a clunky ship through a hairpin. That’s one of the most common things in nullsec, while dicking around in lowsec, taking easy shots, hardly constitute a roam – wether you have four toons for boosting or not.

            August 3, 2013 at 2:50 pm
          3. dafq

            I see no way to argue a point here, you dont like these changes as if they stole your high school girlfriend and it does not matter what i tell you. I do hope that in time you will be able to rething some of the ideas you have now or steal new ones from other people. The main point, CCP have never done sensible rebalancing and it is almost as if they dont play eve but a random number generator. It also looks these changes are serving tournament style fights, may it be that they are paving the way for a more competitive style of fighting and wanting to get piece of that pro gaming pie?

            TL;DR – Pls! The BoX! Get out!

            August 4, 2013 at 6:38 pm
          4. Noisrevbus

            It’s not surprising that you see no way to argue the point, since you have avoided making any form of concrete argument from the get go. Do tell me more elongated “no u”, “nerds and girlfriends” and “it’s pointless talking about spaceships” comments though – instead of trying to suggest these changes would help small gangs hotdrop. I found that far more offensive. The only question left unsaid is wether the small-gang CS-backed hotdrops were just trolling or if you actually believe it will help you small-gang hotdrop.

            August 6, 2013 at 12:01 am
  14. Noisrevbus

    These changes were expected, not that it makes them any less stupid … but they hardly come as a surprise.

    Forcing links out of towers (and long-term on-grid) is generally a good thing.

    Giving (tanky-) CS 15% links and (fast/cloaky-) T3 10% links is yet another slap in the face of risk-taking, small-gang and undermanned PvP. This will make it more difficult to fight a larger gang with a smaller gang and will simply trickle more groups into 1:1 gameplay. It’s the opposite of what EVE needs right now. It will lead to more “honobru” bullshit, not less.

    Spreading the links around is also yet another placation and streamline because they can’t seem to balance their shit anymore and just go to appease everyone short-term. Long-term more people are going to realize the level of stupidity involved here, when they have no reason to train another ship and everyone can have everything etc.

    The douchebags celebrating these changes on the basis of this being “fair” and “levelling their playing field” have yet to realize that these changes are, mechanics wise, worse balanced and people will use this imbalance to devise new ways to screw you over in your themepark of choice – then you will be crying for more nerfs again. These changes don’t solve your problem, they just screw the overall balance.

    The biggest impact this will is that now the large gang running CS + Huginn will have a longer engagement-range than the small gang running T3 + Rapier (who can’t run CS + Huginn because they can’t assume to tank a larger gang). It will also impact any smaller gang (cloakies, frigates etc.). because now their fast- or cloaky go-to booster is worse than the larger gang, so the larger gangs support-frigates will go faster and be stronger than the smaller gang of frigates.

    Congratulations on feeding the blob :).

    In Honorland, it shouldn’t take too long for someone to find some new way to screw with your percieved 1:1 fairness. It’s not like a booster is any less valuable against someone who have no booster at all with these changes. It’s Falcons all over again, taking away their ability to be an equalizer for a small-gang punching up – yet leaving their ability for a larger gang to blanket down, or blanket a solo player. Retards applauded that change in the name of “small-gang PvP” back then as well, but look at them now, whining about ECM because the only thing that got shafted was it’s competetive use outside of being a gank-tool.

    August 2, 2013 at 1:39 pm Reply
  15. fuck ccp

    fuck this bullshit

    after everything they fucked up now they start with this
    let em do soemthing usefull and repair whats broken for a change instead of repairing things that are not broken and fucking the game up in meantime

    whats it what ccp that everyone stops playoing cause that is what will end up happening that all who play mow will stop

    August 3, 2013 at 12:21 am Reply
  16. Fartolio

    I love how CCP presents to us broken toys as improved toys. And a lot of assl*ckers bite on that.

    Fozzy is a idiot.
    This game used to be awesome. Bring this back.
    This style, in 2 years we will fly all Ibises and civilian railguns, to have their famous balance.

    August 3, 2013 at 3:06 am Reply
  17. commanderbolt

    So they are dumbing down eve, making it more noob friendly I see. LOL

    August 5, 2013 at 11:17 am Reply

Leave a Reply