Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Chitsa Jason
Infinity Explorers Exhale.
724
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 10:52:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hello everyone,
I would like some feedback.
Do you think black holes need change of effect? If yes then what new effects would you propose?
Thank you for your answers!
CSM8 Member Twitter:-á@ChitsaJason Skype: Casparas
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
7319
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 11:10:00 -
[2] - Quote
Adding a blue tag to this thread.
Help the CSM help CCP help you. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/ |
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Polarized.
955
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 11:15:00 -
[3] - Quote
I would tone down both the positive and negative effects and maybe add some sort of damage application bonus. E.g. increased optimal range and tracking for turrets and missiles.
More drastically, i would add an extra static to all black hole systems. Putting work in since 2010. |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon Suddenly Spaceships.
818
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 11:15:00 -
[4] - Quote
make it have 2x time dilation
IE everything happens at twice the speed |
Freddie Merrcury
Axiom Inc.
7
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 11:16:00 -
[5] - Quote
They absolutely need a change.
Reducing the inertia change to make navigation a bit less awkward would be nice.
As they are now, Black holes are the worst effect for both PvE and PvP.
PvE wise, they do nothing to make the PvE easier or faster.
From the PvP standpoint, the effect doesn't really allow any sort of special method of flying or fitting to take greater advantage of the effect. I been kicked out of better homes than this. |
Glasgow Dunlop
Gigaverse Strictly Unprofessional
82
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 11:22:00 -
[6] - Quote
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:make it have 2x time dilation
IE everything happens at twice the speed
seriously that would be a cool wormhole to live in...
that and make black hole effects random for dt to dt twitter: @glasgowdunlop-á GLASGOW MEET No.3 OCT 5th http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=229549&find=unread
|
Godfrey Silvarna
Frozen Dawn Inc Arctic Light
84
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 11:27:00 -
[7] - Quote
How about a slight bonus to warp disruptor and scrambler strength and the efficiency of stasis webifiers but a penalty to ship velocity and weapon range? This would use the theme of the vicinity of black holes being hard to get out of. Though now that I think of it, any and all bonuses to webifiers are more than slightly risky so the downside to weapon systems would have tp be pretty dramatic to avoid obvious consequences with dreads.
This might make black holes a bit too good though. It is not a bad thing that there is a difference between the desirability of wormhole effects. Problem with black holes is not that they are bad, but that they are bad in a very uninteresting way. |
Chitsa Jason
Infinity Explorers Exhale.
724
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 11:31:00 -
[8] - Quote
Godfrey Silvarna wrote:How about a slight bonus to warp disruptor and scrambler strength and the efficiency of stasis webifiers but a penalty to ship velocity and weapon range? This would use the theme of the vicinity of black holes being hard to get out of. Though now that I think of it, any and all bonuses to webifiers are more than slightly risky so the downside to weapon systems would have tp be pretty dramatic to avoid obvious consequences with dreads.
This might make black holes a bit too good though. It is not a bad thing that there is a difference between the desirability of wormhole effects. Problem with black holes is not that they are bad, but that they are bad in a very uninteresting way.
Anything to do with webs would help farming and dread blaping. I think we don't want dread blaping to be more effective than it is right now. CSM8 Member Twitter:-á@ChitsaJason Skype: Casparas
|
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1426
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 11:32:00 -
[9] - Quote
Why should blackholes be changed?
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Wormhole_environment_effects
The only people complaining about blackholes live in C5/6 because those penalties are rather harsh. The effects in lower classes are tenable. Any change to blackholes is a buff to income. Since higher classes tend to be extremely profitable, already, can I get a buff in C4 space income too? HTFU!...for the children! |
Bloemkoolsaus
Viperfleet Inc. Transmission Lost
83
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 11:38:00 -
[10] - Quote
Glasgow Dunlop wrote:that and make black hole effects random for dt to dt
That would make things interesting. |
|
SMT008
SnaiLs aNd FroGs Verge of Collapse
656
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 11:41:00 -
[11] - Quote
Not a single WH effect offers a bonus to missiles.
So I would say, for a C6 BlackHole :
+100% Missile Explosion Velocity +100% Target Painter Efficiency (So that it's 2 times better, that's what I mean) +50% Missile Velocity
If it was just me, I would make it a place for Armor-Missile ships. Ie Sacrilege, HAM Legions, Torp-Typhoons and the like.
There are not many places where those are favored over Blaster-Prots.
Also, I'd like to attract your attention on an important fact (for me, at least) :
There are almost no battleships in wormholes.
What I mean is that yes, T3 > Battleship. That's ok, that's how it is, I'm not arguing about that. I'm arguing about the fact that Battleships really can't be used in wormholes except for a couple Bhaalgorns, Vindics and Armageddons.
The Mass Issue really is a massive issue when it comes to battleship usage. A single capital ship makes a massive change. The Battleship equivalent is just about 10 pointlessesly massive ships that will get blasted off the battlefield by dreads.
Please, seriously consider a special thing that would allow Battleship doctrines to have some breathing room. I mean, that would allow them to be flyable. Sure they'll still get stomped on by Dreads but at least you can use them if you want to.
Considering the fact that T1 battleships have been heavely rebalanced, it would be a shame if we couldn't use them :( |
Chitsa Jason
Infinity Explorers Exhale.
724
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 11:42:00 -
[12] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Why should blackholes be changed? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Wormhole_environment_effects The only people complaining about blackholes live in C5/6 because those penalties are rather harsh. The effects in lower classes are tenable. Any change to blackholes is a buff to income. Since higher classes tend to be extremely profitable, already, can I get a buff in C4 space income too?
/me Not sure if troll or not CSM8 Member Twitter:-á@ChitsaJason Skype: Casparas
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Polarized.
955
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 11:47:00 -
[13] - Quote
It's a troll chitsa... he answered his own question in the same sentence. Putting work in since 2010. |
Archdaimon
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
227
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 11:47:00 -
[14] - Quote
How bout making black holes _the_ place for small ships to fight.
That is give bonuses and penalties compared to size of ship. Hence huge tracking penalties to caps, less to bs etc., but almost none to frigs (maybe even bonus?)
This would make c5/6 systems where _not_ cap pilots could live and fights with out fearing the blob-blap-dreads.
Wormholes have the best accoustics. It's known. - Sing it for me - |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1427
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 11:57:00 -
[15] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:Why should blackholes be changed? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Wormhole_environment_effectsThe only people complaining about blackholes live in C5/6 because those penalties are rather harsh. The effects in lower classes are tenable. Any change to blackholes is a buff to income. Since higher classes tend to be extremely profitable, already, can I get a buff in C4 space income too? /me Not sure if troll or not
Not trolling. The question was clear....why change blackhole effects? They're perfectly acceptable in lower class w-space. Everyone I've seen complain about them lives in higher class wh's. I think I know why. I just want others to state why. Shouldn't they state their case other than what I hear on comms time and time again..."OMG blackholes, I hate blackholes, can't align for sht, too much travel time, wah".
And the only reason to change them is to buff income afaik. So yeah, I think lower classes should get a buff as well since we don't get lucrative cap escalations from the same sites for 3 days. HTFU!...for the children! |
Sith1s Spectre
Sky Fighters Mass Overload
151
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 11:59:00 -
[16] - Quote
People may troll me for it, but you could always keep the current status of them and the trade off is they spawn ice anoms (and will be the only to do so). Least the barges will be easy to gank in them and will give the Indy people something to be happy about CCP please consider hats as a clothing option for our spaceship barbies.-á
Artist impression of what this could potentially be http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t66/ROBC5Z06/sithsig_zps86971c83.jpg |
Chitsa Jason
Infinity Explorers Exhale.
724
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 12:04:00 -
[17] - Quote
Sith1s Spectre wrote:People may troll me for it, but you could always keep the current status of them and the trade off is they spawn ice anoms (and will be the only to do so). Least the barges will be easy to gank in them and will give the Indy people something to be happy about
We are speaking about change of system effects not additional content. CSM8 Member Twitter:-á@ChitsaJason Skype: Casparas
|
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon Suddenly Spaceships.
819
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 12:21:00 -
[18] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:Sith1s Spectre wrote:People may troll me for it, but you could always keep the current status of them and the trade off is they spawn ice anoms (and will be the only to do so). Least the barges will be easy to gank in them and will give the Indy people something to be happy about We are speaking about change of system effects not additional content.
2x time dilation, you did it with alliance tourney you can do it with this :) |
corbexx
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
114
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 12:39:00 -
[19] - Quote
would there be anyway to give black holes more statics |
Sushi Nardieu
Bite Me inc Bitten.
149
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 12:44:00 -
[20] - Quote
I believe the criteria should be neutral effects. Neutral effects are systems like red giants. Another system effect like a wolf rayet or pulsar will just amplify some of the issues CCP are having difficulty dealing with. Those issues are things like links to capitals.
Some effects that I'd like to see in W-space with no particular emphasis on it being in one effect:
Speed Bonus: but not at an expense of anything else.
Local Rep Bonus: Without giving additional buffs like capacitor or resists.
Interdiction bubble size: Make bubbles huge in this system. HICs and DICs included. A downside might be increased cycle time or something like that. This should not affect anchored bubbles because it could get abused.
Battleship gun bonus: Wolf Rayets give bonus to small guns, why not encourage battleships again. They are cool The Guns of Knowledge-á |
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
8
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 12:45:00 -
[21] - Quote
Quote:A sufficiently compact mass will deform spacetime to form a black hole, a region of spacetime from which nothing, not even light, can escape. Around a black hole there is a surface called an event horizon that marks the point of no return. Black Hole Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 5 Class 6 Inertia Multiplier 1.25 1.44 1.55 1.68 1.85 2.00 Max Range Multiplier 0.90 0.81 0.73 0.66 0.59 0.50 Falloff Modifier 0.90 0.81 0.73 0.66 0.59 0.50 Missile Velocity Multiplier 0.90 0.81 0.73 0.66 0.59 0.50 Maximum velocity multiplier 1.25 1.44 1.55 1.68 1.85 2.00 Control range multiplier 0.90 0.81 0.73 0.66 0.59 0.50
So, from the look of things the original intent was to support MWD/AB PvP at basically knife range, except that's not exactly uncommon anyway and the speed change actually throws a lot of things out of whack as far as speed tanking goes. It's fun to like, zoom around in a cov-ops your first trip into one but I can't imagine living in one.
I do like the theme though but the other sites have much more direct buffs to certain styles of play. Some more than others, certainly, but the black hole is more of a fun toy than somewhere you would want to live because of how it functions.
How about the following:
I'm going for a theme around missile based bonuses. They tend to not get a lot of love in PvP or elsewhere and I think it would be cool to have a wormhole where the Phoenix really shines as a dread of choice.
Missile velocity increase: Not too much, say 5% or even 2.5% per class level but enough to make the Tengu and other missile boats have some really scary damage projection. Right now I don't feel the current decrease adds much beyond a "no HAM Legion fleets here" sign and some annoyance. Besides it conflicts rather annoyingly with the velocity bonus to everything else.
Explosion Radius: Decreased by up to 50%. Potential problems with dread-blap but possibly mitigated by the missile travel time, giving enemies in PvP the chance to react to the incoming missiles and overheat hardeners and mitigate damage.
Tracking: Minus 5% per level. This basically says if you're bringing gun-boats into this hole you'd better not rely on tracking or bring tons of webs. Moros, go home you're drunk.
Falloff: I'm somewhat partial to the falloff penalty but that might be too much of a hit to Arties which would, at this point, be the least affected turret system. The idea here is that space is a little distorted so your guns are pretty hit or miss.
Warp Velocity: This is more of a "just for fun" thing that may end up having interesting consequences. Lets let warp zip you around up to 50% faster. Maybe this will let your bomber beat that Noctis back to the exit hole, maybe not.
Velocity Bonus: After some mulling I think I'd leave this but at max 50% effectiveness. Yes, it hurts missile damage but in PvE you can web everything down anyway and the explosion radius boost helps mitigate it, especially with larger missiles. It supports a kiting setup which range boosted missiles would be absolutely scary in or short range brawls with heavy use of Webs.
Overall I think this would help give Black Holes a unique play style, similar to the other wormholes and allow owners of a Black Hole to make use of some less utilized ships in defense of their home (and for making tons of ISK). |
Chitsa Jason
Infinity Explorers Exhale.
724
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 12:49:00 -
[22] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Quote:A sufficiently compact mass will deform spacetime to form a black hole, a region of spacetime from which nothing, not even light, can escape. Around a black hole there is a surface called an event horizon that marks the point of no return. Black Hole Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 5 Class 6 Inertia Multiplier 1.25 1.44 1.55 1.68 1.85 2.00 Max Range Multiplier 0.90 0.81 0.73 0.66 0.59 0.50 Falloff Modifier 0.90 0.81 0.73 0.66 0.59 0.50 Missile Velocity Multiplier 0.90 0.81 0.73 0.66 0.59 0.50 Maximum velocity multiplier 1.25 1.44 1.55 1.68 1.85 2.00 Control range multiplier 0.90 0.81 0.73 0.66 0.59 0.50 So, from the look of things the original intent was to support MWD/AB PvP at basically knife range, except that's not exactly uncommon anyway and the speed change actually throws a lot of things out of whack as far as speed tanking goes. It's fun to like, zoom around in a cov-ops your first trip into one but I can't imagine living in one. I do like the theme though but the other sites have much more direct buffs to certain styles of play. Some more than others, certainly, but the black hole is more of a fun toy than somewhere you would want to live because of how it functions.
How about the following: I'm going for a theme around missile based bonuses. They tend to not get a lot of love in PvP or elsewhere and I think it would be cool to have a wormhole where the Phoenix really shines as a dread of choice. Missile velocity increase: Not too much, say 5% or even 2.5% per class level but enough to make the Tengu and other missile boats have some really scary damage projection. Right now I don't feel the current decrease adds much beyond a "no HAM Legion fleets here" sign and some annoyance. Besides it conflicts rather annoyingly with the velocity bonus to everything else. Explosion Radius: Decreased by up to 50%. Potential problems with dread-blap but possibly mitigated by the missile travel time, giving enemies in PvP the chance to react to the incoming missiles and overheat hardeners and mitigate damage. Tracking: Minus 5% per level. This basically says if you're bringing gun-boats into this hole you'd better not rely on tracking or bring tons of webs. Moros, go home you're drunk. Falloff: I'm somewhat partial to the falloff penalty but that might be too much of a hit to Arties which would, at this point, be the least affected turret system. The idea here is that space is a little distorted so your guns are pretty hit or miss. Warp Velocity: This is more of a "just for fun" thing that may end up having interesting consequences. Lets let warp zip you around up to 50% faster. Maybe this will let your bomber beat that Noctis back to the exit hole, maybe not. Velocity Bonus: After some mulling I think I'd leave this but at max 50% effectiveness. Yes, it hurts missile damage but in PvE you can web everything down anyway and the explosion radius boost helps mitigate it, especially with larger missiles. It supports a kiting setup which range boosted missiles would be absolutely scary in or short range brawls with heavy use of Webs.
Overall I think this would help give Black Holes a unique play style, similar to the other wormholes and allow owners of a Black Hole to make use of some less utilized ships in defense of their home (and for making tons of ISK).
I need more posts like this one :)
CSM8 Member Twitter:-á@ChitsaJason Skype: Casparas
|
Dgram Loop
Probe Patrol Polarized.
15
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 12:50:00 -
[23] - Quote
Armor Resist: -100% Shield Resist: -100% Hull Resist: +100% Hull HP + 50% (And possibly) X-Large Weapon Damage: -100% or -500% even This example is for a C6, percentages should be lowered for lower classes of course.
Then all we need are t1/t2 cruisers and a carrier with remote hull repairer bonuses ;) |
Bern Rath
Sanctum Void
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 13:14:00 -
[24] - Quote
These may make for interesting conditions. The aim being to support ranged/kiting encounters and less in your face close range brawling.
Ship velocity +25%, +44%, +55%, +68%, +85%, +100%
Bomb velocity +25%, +44%, +55%, +68%, +85%, +100%
Missile velocity +5%, +10%, +15%, +20%, +25%
Energy Destabilization/Leech Effects -10%, -19%, -27%, -41%, -50%
Capacitor recharge -10%, -19%, -27%, -41%, -50%
ECM Strength -10%, -19%, -27%, -41%, -50%
|
Axloth Okiah
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
147
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 13:28:00 -
[25] - Quote
Keep the current negative effects but make all Black Holes spawn additional static (either of the same type as the system already has, random class, same class as is the system or whatever). Benefits would be: a) more connections in wspace, higher chance to run into someone b) ppl could make a choice between living under beneficial system effect (pulsar, WR, etc.) or live with **** effect but having the benefit and opportunity of having access to more systems and more content (pvp, pve or logistics).
And after all, it might even make some kind of scifi logic that black hole will attract more wormholes. W-Space Realtor |
Cipreh
Anomalous Existence
484
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 13:44:00 -
[26] - Quote
Drop the bonuses/penalties, and make them more unique.
I feel that black holes should be made to reflect CCP's original goals for w-space, uninhabitable wild space, with increased risk, and increased rewards.
No moons. Uninhabitable for any extended length of time. More or better sites. (Someone mentioned ice in w-space?) Multiple (2+) Statics or increased chance of K162. (Maybe shorter timers on the statics?) =================================================
I have a much longer post about this, but I am at work at the moment and will finish it when I get home. Consider this space reserved.
Blog: http://lostwithoutlocal.blogspot.com Twitter: @Cipreh I am also available on Skype, details available upon request. Feel free to contact me via any of the above methods,or in-game. |
stup idity
43
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 14:26:00 -
[27] - Quote
I like the dual static idea from above very much.
Regarding effects:
proposal 1 - use what's already there and turn it around: - more lock range - faster missiles - more drone range - more fall-off - less speed
proposal 2 - move bonuses out of combat focus: - bonus to gas harvesting - bonus to mining - bonus to ore compression - more/other industry bonuses
proposal 3 - more war, less e-war: - bonus to sensor strength - bonus to scan resolution - bonus to warp bubbles - reduce efficieny of various e-war effects (painter, web, dampener, ecm)
How about messing with: - cloaking - scanning/d-scan - ship mass - spawn rate of sites ?
edit:
one more: - bonus to scanning - increase number of w-space connections - increase number of connections to other w-space systems that already have a connection to a black hole system significantly I am the Herald of all beings that are me. |
Elfred Gam'Havoc
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 14:40:00 -
[28] - Quote
While I haven't spent much time in W-space other than exploring my way through it to other parts of K-space...
Making Black Holes unique and more in line with the unknown could be really interesting.
I think mass penalties are obvious - what about drag towards the BH? Velocity bonus towards the center of the system, penalty heading out? Missiles getting bonuses vs non-self propelled weapons is also a good idea. Tracking with gravity bending trajectories should be incredibly bad! Light & medium drones get bonused for same reason, heavies and sentries penalized for their mass and inability to move quickly.
No planets, no moons, as they've already been dragged into oblivion. Maybe extra mining opportunities, belts & ice, as they've been pulled in system. Comet mining? Cracked/pulverized planetoids?
Extra connections makes sense, after all the immense gravity should have something to do with the time/space function of Wormholes.
I also like the idea of some sort of time dilation! |
Chitsa Jason
Infinity Explorers Exhale.
724
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 14:53:00 -
[29] - Quote
Elfred Gam'Havoc wrote:While I haven't spent much time in W-space other than exploring my way through it to other parts of K-space...
Making Black Holes unique and more in line with the unknown could be really interesting.
I think mass penalties are obvious - what about drag towards the BH? Velocity bonus towards the center of the system, penalty heading out? Missiles getting bonuses vs non-self propelled weapons is also a good idea. Tracking with gravity bending trajectories should be incredibly bad! Light & medium drones get bonused for same reason, heavies and sentries penalized for their mass and inability to move quickly.
No planets, no moons, as they've already been dragged into oblivion. Maybe extra mining opportunities, belts & ice, as they've been pulled in system. Comet mining? Cracked/pulverized planetoids?
Extra connections makes sense, after all the immense gravity should have something to do with the time/space function of Wormholes.
I also like the idea of some sort of time dilation!
The effects have to be easy to understand and not require much dev time. Removing moons or adding drag might be a bit complicated. CSM8 Member Twitter:-á@ChitsaJason Skype: Casparas
|
Chitsa Jason
Infinity Explorers Exhale.
725
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 14:58:00 -
[30] - Quote
Quote:proposal 2 - move bonuses out of combat focus: - bonus to gas harvesting - bonus to mining - bonus to ore compression - more/other industry bonuses
I do like this one as it would boost miner corps a bit considering grav site -> anomaly nerf.
Keep those suggestions coming though. The more the better. CSM8 Member Twitter:-á@ChitsaJason Skype: Casparas
|
|
Elfred Gam'Havoc
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 15:05:00 -
[31] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:
The effects have to be easy to understand and not require much dev time. Removing moons or adding drag might be a bit complicated.
Replace planets/moons with mining anom sites, rename them "Shattered World"?
I understand that a physics engine change would not be a "small thing", but I think it would be cool none the less. If it was feasable... have ships exert their own gravity too... think you're going to burn away from that Capital so easily? NOPE!
I digress.
TiDi with industry bonuses could make for some (dare I say) enjoyable mining content. |
James Solo
Bite Me inc Bitten.
2
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 15:38:00 -
[32] - Quote
Combining suggestions I like most in this thread with a few of my own: Wipe current bonuses.
- Add a Dual static
This alone will make it extremely valuable for pvp corps. Because of this value, pve should be harder, not easier in higher class wormholes.
- Local rep bonus (shield and armor)
Allows lower class black holes to be viable for smaller pvp corps and PVE becomes easier for them as well. Barrier to entry is low because tanking alone becomes easier.
- Proportional remote rep nerf
Makes it a lot harder to run the higher class sites, still viable however(people always find a way)
- 100% bonus to large hybrid, laser, and projectile turret damage, 100% to torpedo and cruise missile damage in a c6, scaled down accordingly for lower classes.
This way there is more room for playing with mass, teir3 battlecruisers can use the large guns in a c1 without having to build the battleship there. This will have interesting effects on stealth bomber damage as well.
- 75% less effectiveness of webs and target painters in a c6.
This has the dual purpose of making dread blapping hard, but making sites still doable. You just have to use more webs or figure out other ways of killing sleepers. Also scaled down for lower classes.
- Proportional bonus to range of webs, scram/point, and target painters
If a dual static cannot be done in a c5/c6 with the current programming, would it be possible to allow the ihub upgrade "Quantum Flux Generator" effects to the system by default? Essentially making them just very busy wormholes. |
Ghenghis Kralj
Big Johnson's PLEASE NOT VIOLENCE OUR BOATS
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 15:50:00 -
[33] - Quote
I agree with some of the others. Lower level black holes are not as bad as they are made out to be and can be quite livable. The problem is that the other wh effects are quite positive for pve, pvp, and daily living activities. Black holes are acceptable for pve and pvp in lower class wormholes, but make daily living activities more of a headache and risk. There is no advantage in higher class wormholes for pve or pvp. It just gets frustrating. Good luck getting drones back in your bay. Given that you can get empty wormholes, it's more that the competitive advantage of black holes is lacking relative to everything else. And for some, the warp time risk is not acceptable.
The main reason that I won't live in the a black whole is that EVE is a game of logic, and black wholes are illogical. My ship travelers faster, but my missiles slower?! What kind of loopey physics are those? In that case, might as well screw with ship mass. Buzzard weighs like a billion kg and a Moros 10 kg.
I think there are two solutions: 1. Change the basic effects offered by black wholes to something others have suggested: Missle damage bonus, explosion radius, indy (although not necessary imo), etc.
2. Make living easier and decrease the negative effects on inertia and missile velocity. |
Cosmic Scanner
Temnava Legion No Holes Barred
18
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 16:19:00 -
[34] - Quote
Black holes: * Missile Love - aka missile equivalent of magnetar. OR * Unique uninhabitable luxury system with lots of statics and high probability of inbound wormholes.
All Wormholes: * Dual Statics * More "Roaming" / "Wondering" wormholes (Especially for C4 to K-Space)
All this would mean more interaction between players in w-space. More PVP, less farming security, epic chains, the list goes on...
Cosmic Scanner / muu lufragga |
sten mattson
1st Praetorian Guard Curatores Veritatis Alliance
45
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 16:51:00 -
[35] - Quote
instead of tracking nerf , a reduction/boost to gun resolution? :P IMMA FIRING MA LAZAR!!! |
Godfrey Silvarna
Frozen Dawn Inc Arctic Light
84
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 17:43:00 -
[36] - Quote
Archdaimon wrote:How bout making black holes _the_ place for small ships to fight.
That is give bonuses and penalties compared to size of ship. Hence huge tracking penalties to caps, less to bs etc., but almost none to frigs (maybe even bonus?)
This would make c5/6 systems where _not_ cap pilots could live and fights with out fearing the blob-blap-dreads.
I am starting to really like this idea. |
Proclus Diadochu
Obstergo Bitten.
343
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 17:55:00 -
[37] - Quote
Personally liked the changing wormhole effects for Blackholes (downtime to downtime).
Blackholes can be a unique anomoly where CCP could write up something to pull random effects of the other wormholes, plus maybe add a couple more uniques, so it would always be interesting to see what perks and drawbacks you would have in the hole. It could be fun. ~Boredom Breeds Direction~ |
CeNSeR
Jazz Associates Azgoths of Kria
38
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 17:59:00 -
[38] - Quote
Ideal opportunity for CCP to have a little play.
Duel statics but change the rule e.g C2's where there is a W -space and a K - space static.
Null and a Highsec static would prove to be a major "conflict driver"
Cade Windstalkers input i thought was great, having a wormhole where underused ships like the Phoenix and the ham Legion could be a viable option would be cool. |
James Solo
Bite Me inc Bitten.
2
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 18:07:00 -
[39] - Quote
Godfrey Silvarna wrote:Archdaimon wrote:How bout making black holes _the_ place for small ships to fight.
That is give bonuses and penalties compared to size of ship. Hence huge tracking penalties to caps, less to bs etc., but almost none to frigs (maybe even bonus?)
This would make c5/6 systems where _not_ cap pilots could live and fights with out fearing the blob-blap-dreads.
I am starting to really like this idea.
I like this as well, but its important that whatever changes be made be balanced with future changes to the way dread guns track smaller ships anyway. Dreads still need to be usable for reinforcing towers and shooting carriers and other dreads, otherwise the effect just makes it so "most carriers + t3's" wins since it takes an enormous amount of t3 dps to take down RR'ing carriers, especially if they're orbiting your dreads with 100mn AB's going or something silly and you cant track them. I still think limiting EWAR is the way to go so that orbiting t3's and gardians are very hard to hit with dreads, but carriers, since they're already very slow anyway are still easy targets. Webs and paints are what makes dread blapping viable in the first place. |
StarFleetCommander
V0LTA Verge of Collapse
173
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 18:10:00 -
[40] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Adding a blue tag to this thread.
Help the CSM help CCP help you.
CCP Fozzie in the Wormhole section
Something must be up
I think all wormholes should have dual statics |
|
Lloyd Roses
Blue-Fire Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
148
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 18:18:00 -
[41] - Quote
Can't you just go from acceleration of things to 'slow things down'?
Currently, the most annoying thing in Eve is 'recalling Warrior IIs you dropped for any reason whatsoever', so if a wormhole would just reduce maximum velocity of a ship, it would even play arguably alright together with those other current effects. Or so.
I only correct my own spelling. |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
537
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 18:19:00 -
[42] - Quote
Black hole effect : No D-scan G££ <= Me |
Terrorfrodo
Renegade Hobbits for Mordor
568
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 18:31:00 -
[43] - Quote
Couldn't think of something good myself, but I like these two ideas best:
SMT008 wrote:Not a single WH effect offers a bonus to missiles.
So I would say, for a C6 BlackHole :
+100% Missile Explosion Velocity +100% Target Painter Efficiency (So that it's 2 times better, that's what I mean) +50% Missile Velocity
If it was just me, I would make it a place for Armor-Missile ships. Ie Sacrilege, HAM Legions, Torp-Typhoons and the like.
There are not many places where those are favored over Blaster-Prots.
Also, I'd like to attract your attention on an important fact (for me, at least) :
There are almost no battleships in wormholes.
What I mean is that yes, T3 > Battleship. That's ok, that's how it is, I'm not arguing about that. I'm arguing about the fact that Battleships really can't be used in wormholes except for a couple Bhaalgorns, Vindics and Armageddons.
The Mass Issue really is a massive issue when it comes to battleship usage. A single capital ship makes a massive change. The Battleship equivalent is just about 10 pointlessesly massive ships that will get blasted off the battlefield by dreads.
Please, seriously consider a special thing that would allow Battleship doctrines to have some breathing room. I mean, that would allow them to be flyable. Sure they'll still get stomped on by Dreads but at least you can use them if you want to.
Considering the fact that T1 battleships have been heavely rebalanced, it would be a shame if we couldn't use them :(
Archdaimon wrote:How bout making black holes _the_ place for small ships to fight.
That is give bonuses and penalties compared to size of ship. Hence huge tracking penalties to caps, less to bs etc., but almost none to frigs (maybe even bonus?)
This would make c5/6 systems where _not_ cap pilots could live and fights with out fearing the blob-blap-dreads.
As for TiDi, if something like that were to happen, I'd want it to be slower, not faster. That way Black Holes would become a kind of training system where you can think about your next move. Almost like turn-based combat. I love turn-based combat
But it won't happen, TiDi would decrease pve income and reverse TiDi would massively increase it, no chance CCP would do this. . |
Kynric
Sky Fighters Mass Overload
16
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 18:58:00 -
[44] - Quote
The engineer in me does not like the fact that ships and missles react differently to the same weather. Please set the missle speed bonus to match the ship speed bonus. I would prefer the remaining penalties remain as it is interesting having a pretty terrible weather type in the mix.
I do like the suggestion that black holes might have additional worm hole connections. I would rather this be done with additional periodics that lead to or from these systems rather than additional statics. Having random extra doors which lead to a variety of places is more intersting than having a reliable number of doors which go to predictable places. |
Dark HicQuaVideeum
Section 8. Fatal Ascension
72
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 20:22:00 -
[45] - Quote
i say put some into increased missile velocity and turret tracking, keep the speed strengh and add a sig reduction, keep reduced tracking and falloff, means that ppl will be able to use the speed tanking with improvement to missile damage and turret damage at close range |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
9
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 20:41:00 -
[46] - Quote
Cipreh wrote:No moons. Uninhabitable for any extended length of time. More or better sites. (Someone mentioned ice in w-space?) Multiple (2+) Statics or increased chance of K162. (Maybe shorter timers on the statics?)
The problem with this is it doesn't make Black Hole systems better it makes them something everyone else wants to find and fails to address the combat bonus/penalty problem.
Never mind all of the meta problems with having Ice in WH-space. |
Poloturion
Lead Farmers Kill It With Fire
29
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 20:43:00 -
[47] - Quote
Ships go faster so make the other stuff go faster. Replace missile speed nerf with buff, and increase optimal / falloff on guns.
The extra static is interesting and makes sense I guess.
Removing moons is hilariously unfeasible. Believe it or not but I think there are actually some people living in black holes, and I can't imagine CCP coming along exploding their moons/POS. Also, please fix POS. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
9
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 20:43:00 -
[48] - Quote
Dark HicQuaVideeum wrote:i say put some into increased missile velocity and turret tracking, keep the speed strengh and add a sig reduction, keep reduced tracking and falloff, means that ppl will be able to use the speed tanking with improvement to missile damage and turret damage at close range
The inertia penalty still rather kills speed tanking though, and the speed boost is already enough of a buff to speed/sig tanking without double-bonusing it. Never mind that 100MN T3s are pretty common already. |
Dark HicQuaVideeum
Section 8. Fatal Ascension
72
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 20:49:00 -
[49] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Dark HicQuaVideeum wrote:i say put some into increased missile velocity and turret tracking, keep the speed strengh and add a sig reduction, keep reduced tracking and falloff, means that ppl will be able to use the speed tanking with improvement to missile damage and turret damage at close range The inertia penalty still rather kills speed tanking though, and the speed boost is already enough of a buff to speed/sig tanking without double-bonusing it. Never mind that 100MN T3s are pretty common already.
then take away the inertia penalty, and dont add a sig reduction, but do increase dmg at small ranges |
Mohsar Trilar
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 21:03:00 -
[50] - Quote
stup idity wrote:I like the dual static idea from above very much. proposal 2 - move bonuses out of combat focus: - bonus to gas harvesting - bonus to mining - bonus to ore compression - more/other industry bonuses
How about we keep the inertia penalty and velocity bonus along with add significant bonuses to gas harvesting and mining. That way, miners can make more money in a black hole but the inertia penalty makes them more vulnerable to hunters. Possibly add an effect that makes ratting easier like a buff to missile damage or resistance to neuts.
Alternatively, I like the idea of Black Holes encouraging fast, brawling ships. Maybe reduce/remove the inertia penalty and add a webbing range bonus (that could be a bit crazy though). |
|
Winthorp
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
175
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 21:31:00 -
[51] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Why should blackholes be changed? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Wormhole_environment_effects The only people complaining about blackholes live in C5/6 because those penalties are rather harsh. The effects in lower classes are tenable. Any change to blackholes is a buff to income. Since higher classes tend to be extremely profitable, already, can I get a buff in C4 space income too?
To be fair even in C2 and on the affect is enough to make you not bother with that WH, i mean seriously why would you live in one. |
Winthorp
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
175
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 21:33:00 -
[52] - Quote
Good to see CCP are willing to listen and look at this, you mention not wanting to make dread blapping worse with a web bonus, but this is yours and CCP's chance to look at this and make this a WH effect worth fighting over. Don't avoid making the effects over the top, make it so good groups evict each other to have. |
M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
256
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 21:40:00 -
[53] - Quote
A different bonus is definitely a good idea, whenever we roll to a Black Hole system there is a collective groan on coms, regardless of the static.
Anything that doubles align time is just a bad idea, since it makes escaping twice as hard, and therefore makes everything unnecessarily riskier. How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |
Winthorp
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
175
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 21:52:00 -
[54] - Quote
Dscan delay in seconds 5 - 10 - 15 - 20 - 25 Multiple static WH - WH - WH - K-space - Kspace |
M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
256
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 22:05:00 -
[55] - Quote
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:make it have 2x time dilation
IE everything happens at twice the speed
seriously that would be a cool wormhole to live in...
And change the sound in Black Holes to this... How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |
M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
256
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 22:23:00 -
[56] - Quote
Make it like the opposite of a Cat Variable, bonus to local reps, nerf remote reps in the same percentages as they are in Cat Variables How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
10
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 22:49:00 -
[57] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:Make it like the opposite of a Cat Variable, bonus to local reps, nerf remote reps in the same percentages as they are in Cat Variables
This would almost completely kill Black Holes past C3 where RR is basically a requirement. Even a dread-blap fleet needs a triage carrier to stop the support ships from going pop. |
TwiKnight
Super Elite Friendship Club
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 23:10:00 -
[58] - Quote
black holes should be dark dreary places. the system graphic affect should make the whole system dark with a small beam of light/radiation coming from the event horizon. ideas for the system affects would be limiting d scan range 10% per wh level so 60% in a c6. it also should have a delay with the new scanner interface, a 2 min delay per wh level so 12 min delay in a c6 on a wh or sig popping up for your scanning window/probes to get the information. there should be some risk for farming sites and this would give people a chance to get the drop on you. i would say keep the velocity bonus all though it should be reversed 100% in a c1 and 25% in a c6. just like others have stated no wh has a bonus to missiles only negatives so reverse the missile velocity to positive so 50% in a c1 and 10% in a c6. idk how feasible it would be but maybe shorten the grids in the wh's because of the black hole affect visibility would be shortened. kind of how locking range is limited now but applied to grid affects so the ship disappears into the darkness. with stretching grid mechanics idk how possible it is just a thought. basically a black hole limits your intel because it is consuming the light in which the info would be traveling on to reach your ship and you gain increased velocity to missiles and your ship because the wh is on the very edge of the event horizon. it would be a unique affect in the fact most of the good bonuses apply fully in low end wh's and the negatives apply fully to high end wh's. |
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2229
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 23:22:00 -
[59] - Quote
Just change the agility penalty to an agility buff and youre done. Go faster but at better agility with range reduction on guns seems fine to me. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
10
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 02:26:00 -
[60] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Just change the agility penalty to an agility buff and youre done. Go faster but at better agility with range reduction on guns seems fine to me.
Except that you end up shooting yourself in the foot. Great, you're faster, down-side, you have less range to play with on your kiting ship which means you're more likely to be in range of points, webs, and all that other fun stuff. |
|
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2230
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 03:46:00 -
[61] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Just change the agility penalty to an agility buff and youre done. Go faster but at better agility with range reduction on guns seems fine to me. Except that you end up shooting yourself in the foot. Great, you're faster, down-side, you have less range to play with on your kiting ship which means you're more likely to be in range of points, webs, and all that other fun stuff. yup. it's called a 'trade off' i believe. it would be a good kiting system if you know what youre doing and it would be a great get up in your face system for catching and brawling people.
the way it is not is you need to be in close range, but can't get there because navigation in god awful under double speed and half agility. |
Haseo Antares
Corollary Forest Fairytail.
53
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 04:05:00 -
[62] - Quote
How about increasing the base stats of all t1 figs, dessis and cruisers by a factor of 10 and reducing the base stats of all other ship types by a factor of 5. Pulling numbers out of thin air here lol... We currently have the world's greatest linguists and scientists trying to decode whatn++ you just said. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
10
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 04:13:00 -
[63] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Just change the agility penalty to an agility buff and youre done. Go faster but at better agility with range reduction on guns seems fine to me. Except that you end up shooting yourself in the foot. Great, you're faster, down-side, you have less range to play with on your kiting ship which means you're more likely to be in range of points, webs, and all that other fun stuff. yup. it's called a 'trade off' i believe. it would be a good kiting system if you know what youre doing and it would be a great get up in your face system for catching and brawling people. the way it is not is you need to be in close range, but can't get there because navigation in god awful under double speed and half agility.
That still comes out as a lousy trade-off and does very little to make them more appealing at the high end.
Plus your brawling fit is going to lose over half its DPS because you've got **** for range and with the increased speed you're orbiting further out and you're losing more damage on the tracking side of things.
Even without inertia there's just too many negatives or almost-negatives in the current bonus-set compared to basically any other WH effect. |
Trinkets friend
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
1084
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 04:24:00 -
[64] - Quote
People who are saying they need a "missile bonused" wormhole effect are misguided. Blackhole effects nerf turret ships more than missile ships; the falloff range penalty actually reduces damage when the ship fights in falloff, which in a Black hole system, is going to be almost always. Then, you will be fighting faster enemies, so tracking is vital.
Missiles, once you are in range, always hit for full damage (adjusted only by target speed). Ergo, fast-moving missile boats are less affected by fast-moving turret ships in black holes. Add a TD and turret ships suffer, but currently nothing reduces missile DPS. You can simply rig off the extra target velocity with flare cat rigs, and you hardly suffer at all except for having to use HMLs and not HAMs.
Drones are a problem;
- They go fast and track worse
- They are hard to scoop
- They require EW interfacing 5, or DLA's, to reduce the penalty = Domis and Carriers only
Additionally, if you are a fast-mover, you can drop your drones (eg, a MWDing Maulus) and be outside of your drone control range before the drone launches and loads onto grid. Luls.
The speed coupled with inertia penalty is really only a massive nerf to capitals, as everything else can i-stab or nano the problem away and take advantage of the speed. No one flies nano Nags, so you just get hit with the penalties (tracking, inertia, etc) - hence the complaints from C5/6 dwellers who get sluggish caps with poor damage projection, faster sleepers which are harder to web down for dread blapping = QQ forum time!
The targeting range penalty is a key part of black holes and I think is essential and must stay. The fun you can have with a Maulus, Arazu or a proper dampstar (5km lock range for sieges...lol) is quite extreme. In essence, this "penalty" can be gamed into a benefit. The drone penalties cannot, and the turret penalties cannot.
The problem is really one of refitting. You can fit or rig off the penalties quite effectively without gimping your fit, up to C4 space. In C5 space this process leaves you nett worse off with benefits that have turned into liabilities. The solution may be replacing or modifying the penalties while retaining the flavour of speed and damps.
Suggestions: Consider other wormhole classes.
- Pulsars get 3 bonuses and 2 negatives.
- Wolf Rayet gets 3 bonuses and 1 negative. No wonder they are so popular.
- Magnetarsget 2 penalties, 1 ridicu-bonus, and its penalty...that you can web off with a Vigilant in no time. Hello blapping.
- Cataclysmic gets 2 penalties, 4 bonuses (really 1 penalty to local reps, 3 bonuses; RR, cap, recharge)
- Red Giant gets one mostly useless bonus outside of C6, and one nonevent except for T3's for 0.01% of the time you live there, when not desperately OH'ing to survive a gank.
If you look at Black Holes objectively you get two bonuses. One is absolute (speed) and the other relative to your play style (inbuilt damp), and 2 penalties - inertia and weapon range (but the weapon penalties are uneven, as explained above). If you haven't figured out kiting Maulus alt yet, it's really 3 penalties and 1 bonus that works against you.
Thus, Black Holes really need one less penalty, or one more bonus. Given extra bonus would make things complicated, it really is down to shaving down the penalties.
Keep the speed bonus Keep the inertia or an agility penalty Keep the targeting range "penalty" to people without a Maulus Remove the weapon penalties and drone penalties entirely. Odds are you won't be shooting to full range anyway (see above). Add a bonus to kinetic and explosive damage. Yes, uber Caldari and Barrage is a possibility, but this is a black hole...if things hit you, they will crush you hard.
Or, if you really want to make me happy...a bonus to hull hitpoints. Make it a hull-tanker's paradise. Million EHP man-tanked carriers ahoy. YOLO is the Carpe Diem of Gen Y http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
Faded Silver
Darkstorm Corporation
3
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 04:45:00 -
[65] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:People who are saying they need a "missile bonused" wormhole effect are misguided. Blackhole effects nerf turret ships more than missile ships; the falloff range penalty actually reduces damage when the ship fights in falloff, which in a Black hole system, is going to be almost always. Then, you will be fighting faster enemies, so tracking is vital. Missiles, once you are in range, always hit for full damage (adjusted only by target speed). Ergo, fast-moving missile boats are less affected by fast-moving turret ships in black holes. Add a TD and turret ships suffer, but currently nothing reduces missile DPS. You can simply rig off the extra target velocity with flare cat rigs, and you hardly suffer at all except for having to use HMLs and not HAMs. Drones are a problem;
- They go fast and track worse
- They are hard to scoop
- They require EW interfacing 5, or DLA's, to reduce the penalty = Domis and Carriers only
Additionally, if you are a fast-mover, you can drop your drones (eg, a MWDing Maulus) and be outside of your drone control range before the drone launches and loads onto grid. Luls. The speed coupled with inertia penalty is really only a massive nerf to capitals, as everything else can i-stab or nano the problem away and take advantage of the speed. No one flies nano Nags, so you just get hit with the penalties (tracking, inertia, etc) - hence the complaints from C5/6 dwellers who get sluggish caps with poor damage projection, faster sleepers which are harder to web down for dread blapping = QQ forum time! The targeting range penalty is a key part of black holes and I think is essential and must stay. The fun you can have with a Maulus, Arazu or a proper dampstar (5km lock range for sieges...lol) is quite extreme. In essence, this "penalty" can be gamed into a benefit. The drone penalties cannot, and the turret penalties cannot. The problem is really one of refitting. You can fit or rig off the penalties quite effectively without gimping your fit, up to C4 space. In C5 space this process leaves you nett worse off with benefits that have turned into liabilities. The solution may be replacing or modifying the penalties while retaining the flavour of speed and damps. Suggestions: Consider other wormhole classes.
- Pulsars get 3 bonuses and 2 negatives.
- Wolf Rayet gets 3 bonuses and 1 negative. No wonder they are so popular.
- Magnetarsget 2 penalties, 1 ridicu-bonus, and its penalty...that you can web off with a Vigilant in no time. Hello blapping.
- Cataclysmic gets 2 penalties, 4 bonuses (really 1 penalty to local reps, 3 bonuses; RR, cap, recharge)
- Red Giant gets one mostly useless bonus outside of C6, and one nonevent except for T3's for 0.01% of the time you live there, when not desperately OH'ing to survive a gank.
If you look at Black Holes objectively you get two bonuses. One is absolute (speed) and the other relative to your play style (inbuilt damp), and 2 penalties - inertia and weapon range (but the weapon penalties are uneven, as explained above). If you haven't figured out kiting Maulus alt yet, it's really 3 penalties and 1 bonus that works against you. Thus, Black Holes really need one less penalty, or one more bonus. Given extra bonus would make things complicated, it really is down to shaving down the penalties. Keep the speed bonus Keep the inertia or an agility penalty Keep the targeting range "penalty" to people without a Maulus Remove the weapon penalties and drone penalties entirely. Odds are you won't be shooting to full range anyway (see above). Add a bonus to kinetic and explosive damage. Yes, uber Caldari and Barrage is a possibility, but this is a black hole...if things hit you, they will crush you hard. Or, if you really want to make me happy...a bonus to hull hitpoints. Make it a hull-tanker's paradise. Million EHP man-tanked carriers ahoy.
I like your analysis, however, Cataclysmic does not provide a bonus to "recharge". It increases maximum capacitor but accordingly adjusts the recharge rate, giving you a larger maximum pool while maintaining the same recharge capability. It is the Pulsar that receives the capacitor recharge buff. |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
918
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 05:00:00 -
[66] - Quote
Blackhole effect: Reduces mass limits on incoming/out-going wormholes by 10/20/30/40/50/60%
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
10
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 05:00:00 -
[67] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:Missiles, once you are in range, always hit for full damage (adjusted only by target speed). Ergo, fast-moving missile boats are less affected by fast-moving turret ships in black holes. Add a TD and turret ships suffer, but currently nothing reduces missile DPS. You can simply rig off the extra target velocity with flare cat rigs, and you hardly suffer at all except for having to use HMLs and not HAMs.
This is blatantly false.
Missiles are affected by by explosion radius, which is compared against the signature size of the target ship. Combine with the speed bonus enemy ships it's not terribly hard to have missiles being completely out-run by fast enemy frigates and doing vastly reduced damage when they do land, especially against Logistics ships which have an already small signature.
Trinkets friend wrote:The speed coupled with inertia penalty is really only a massive nerf to capitals, as everything else can i-stab or nano the problem away and take advantage of the speed. No one flies nano Nags, so you just get hit with the penalties (tracking, inertia, etc) - hence the complaints from C5/6 dwellers who get sluggish caps with poor damage projection, faster sleepers which are harder to web down for dread blapping = QQ forum time!
Have you ever actually tried to orbit in a C5 Black Hole? You end up quite a bit outside your intended orbit and actually changing direction is like trying to slam the breaks on a freight train.
Nano's don't even make the problem go away unless you're in an absurdly low class wormhole.
Trinkets friend wrote:The targeting range penalty is a key part of black holes and I think is essential and must stay. The fun you can have with a Maulus, Arazu or a proper dampstar (5km lock range for sieges...lol) is quite extreme. In essence, this "penalty" can be gamed into a benefit. The drone penalties cannot, and the turret penalties cannot.
Maybe, but for the majority of people it's a massive inconvenience. Would you actually want to live in a Black Hole having to deal with that all the time?
Trinkets friend wrote:Suggestions: Consider other wormhole classes.
- Pulsars get 3 bonuses and 2 negatives.
- Wolf Rayet gets 3 bonuses and 1 negative. No wonder they are so popular.
- Magnetarsget 2 penalties, 1 ridicu-bonus, and its penalty...that you can web off with a Vigilant in no time. Hello blapping.
- Cataclysmic gets 2 penalties, 4 bonuses (really 1 penalty to local reps, 3 bonuses; RR, cap, recharge)
- Red Giant gets one mostly useless bonus outside of C6, and one nonevent except for T3's for 0.01% of the time you live there, when not desperately OH'ing to survive a gank.
If you look at Black Holes objectively you get two bonuses. One is absolute (speed) and the other relative to your play style (inbuilt damp), and 2 penalties - inertia and weapon range (but the weapon penalties are uneven, as explained above). If you haven't figured out kiting Maulus alt yet, it's really 3 penalties and 1 bonus that works against you.
This is, if anything, a highly subjective view of the properties of a black-hole. The speed is a double edged sword, and the range damping is very much a penalty. You may be able to work around it but it's still a massive penalty that is made even worse by the increased speed since managing your range can become difficult to impossible.
Trinkets friend wrote:Thus, Black Holes really need one less penalty, or one more bonus. Given extra bonus would make things complicated, it really is down to shaving down the penalties.
Keep the speed bonus Keep the inertia or an agility penalty Keep the targeting range "penalty" to people without a Maulus Remove the weapon penalties and drone penalties entirely. Odds are you won't be shooting to full range anyway (see above). Add a bonus to kinetic and explosive damage. Yes, uber Caldari and Barrage is a possibility, but this is a black hole...if things hit you, they will crush you hard.
Or, if you really want to make me happy...a bonus to hull hitpoints. Make it a hull-tanker's paradise. Million EHP man-tanked carriers ahoy.
At this point I can't even tell if you're just a horrible troll or if you're really serious.
|
MadbaM
Hard Knocks Inc. Kill It With Fire
42
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 05:12:00 -
[68] - Quote
Iv been struggling with this for a while, because it dose need to be changed although i don't currently have any real idea about how to do it.
But if you could please ask anyone from CCP, when they removed E-War effects from wormholes because of the exploit was a solution ever found or discussed to fix the exploit? or was it just removed and forgot about?
Maybe it would be interesting to bring the E-War bonus back if could be fixed, flip side of this would make the T3 variants more common something i really don't want to see but they are being nerfed tm. However would give a boost to recons/force recons as well as some BS hulls.
From other peoples suggestions i think the industry idea is really interesting and may add a much needed dynamic to some new player driven WH content without CCP having to add a feature/content.
But i think there should be some neg effect that makes them more vulnerable in some way, because with the new scanner systems its impossible to catch a miner that's paying attention.
Also anything that encourages the usage of battle ships in WH's would be good but i'm not sure how you would balance this for the classes of WH's that don't allow there passage.
But i feel encouraging this with buffs to large guns would only make the tier 3 battle cruiser to powerful.
|
Setsune Rin
Bite Me inc Bitten.
44
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 07:32:00 -
[69] - Quote
mostly comes down to a black hole having no real beneficial effects to exploit
the speed is not a benefit in any way (try scooping light drones lol)
and it makes PVE all but impossible because sleepers arent affected by its effects and stay out at their long ranges (not that i'm advocating doing that)
i like the industry effects
speed/inertia and industry so those fat mining barges will have to be on the ball so they warp off before the **** train arrives
combine that with some buffs to POS modules in general (refine array mostly) and maybe add ice spawns in black holes like suggested earlier and you might actually get a half decent hole
|
Trinkets friend
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
1086
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 08:06:00 -
[70] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote: At this point I can't even tell if you're just a horrible troll or if you're really serious.
You, sir, are a nincumpoop.
Here's the rock-paper-scissors thing about missile velocity and frigs in black holes; any frigate which is MWDing so fast it cannot be hit by a missile, is essentially doing it outside of its own targeting range, after taking into account the 85% penalty to lock range. Any frigate which is within lock range so it can tackle you is within slingshotted OH web range and is not a threat.
Secondly, nanos don't make the inertia go away. I never said that. They allow the pilot, who has fit them, to make his ship behave properly versus idiots - like yourself - who don't refit stubbornly and come here whining about black holes. Adapt, deal with it, and gain the advantage.
Your opinion on the lock range penalty is like saying you shouldn't fit shields in a Pulsar because your sig is up 25%. Deal with it, use it to your advantage, and thrive.
This seems to be your whole problem. You whine and blub about the effects and even say Quote:You may be able to work around it but it's still a massive penalty that is made even worse by the increased speed since managing your range can become difficult to impossible.
This is my whole point: work around it, not beat your head against a wall or create straw man fallacies like the mythical dramiel gang which locks from 30km and can bust you AND get back to the WH before you warp off the other side. Sheesh.
I learned to live with a C4 BH effect and did very well by adjusting my tactics. Even so, my allegedly subjective view is based on what is still crap about black holes even if you actually DO adjust to them. Its still a difficult place to be, even in low-end black holes.
As for what tactics I can tell you to use if you ever get over your crying about how it doesn't fit your play style? Let me reiterate:
- Nano's. Fit them!
[*} TE's > gyros/stabs/sinks (at least you hit with TE's)
- Rig for missile velocity and explosion velocity.
- Damps! You get one for free versus every enemy; abuse them!
- Rapier. Do you has?
- Vigilant. Do you has?
- Manual piloting. Can you does?
- Kitey TD Drakes with appropriate rigs. Can you refit? Better yet, HML Cyclones or Prophecies!
- Geddons! No nerf to neut range - try kiting at 44km in a Dram, with no cap, I dare you.
Etcetera. YOLO is the Carpe Diem of Gen Y http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
10
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 08:22:00 -
[71] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote: At this point I can't even tell if you're just a horrible troll or if you're really serious.
You, sir, are a nincumpoop. Here's the rock-paper-scissors thing about missile velocity and frigs in black holes; any frigate which is MWDing so fast it cannot be hit by a missile, is essentially doing it outside of its own targeting range, after taking into account the 85% penalty to lock range. Any frigate which is within lock range so it can tackle you is within slingshotted OH web range and is not a threat. Secondly, nanos don't make the inertia go away. I never said that. They allow the pilot, who has fit them, to make his ship behave properly versus idiots - like yourself - who don't refit stubbornly and come here whining about black holes. Adapt, deal with it, and gain the advantage. Your opinion on the lock range penalty is like saying you shouldn't fit shields in a Pulsar because your sig is up 25%. Deal with it, use it to your advantage, and thrive. This seems to be your whole problem. You whine and blub about the effects and even say Quote:You may be able to work around it but it's still a massive penalty that is made even worse by the increased speed since managing your range can become difficult to impossible. This is my whole point: work around it, not beat your head against a wall or create straw man fallacies like the mythical dramiel gang which locks from 30km and can bust you AND get back to the WH before you warp off the other side. Sheesh. I learned to live with a C4 BH effect and did very well by adjusting my tactics. Even so, my allegedly subjective view is based on what is still crap about black holes even if you actually DO adjust to them. Its still a difficult place to be, even in low-end black holes. As for what tactics I can tell you to use if you ever get over your crying about how it doesn't fit your play style? Let me reiterate:
- Nano's. Fit them!
[*} TE's > gyros/stabs/sinks (at least you hit with TE's)
- Rig for missile velocity and explosion velocity.
- Damps! You get one for free versus every enemy; abuse them!
- Rapier. Do you has?
- Vigilant. Do you has?
- Manual piloting. Can you does?
- Kitey TD Drakes with appropriate rigs. Can you refit? Better yet, HML Cyclones or Prophecies!
- Geddons! No nerf to neut range - try kiting at 44km in a Dram, with no cap, I dare you.
Etcetera.
There is absolutely nothing I can say to this that will result in a productive discussion with you.
Also where the **** are you getting 85% lock range reduction? |
Job Valador
Super Moose Defence Force
175
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 12:34:00 -
[72] - Quote
Me being the industrialist that i am would like too see the mining/harvesting bonuses. Hell for good measure (and if it possible too code) let it have buffs too build speeds, reaction speeds, and bp research and invention speed. chalk it up too being in the proximity of the black hole you gain insite on how stuff works or something.
I know I would fight tooth and nail too have a lab in a black hole if this was the case. "The stone exhibited a profound lack of movement." |
StudleyManiac
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 13:48:00 -
[73] - Quote
All the developer hours that are wasted on what can we implement next how bout we focus on what is broken first.....
POS'es POS'es POS'es Where are our subsystem changes in a wormhole Pos? Coming Real SoonGäó, Where are our modular Pos'es? Too hard to implementGäó.
ISD's I do understand you want to bend CCP's ear and get some new features and all but please don't forget to also campaign for fixing what is borken.
|
MadbaM
Hard Knocks Inc. Kill It With Fire
42
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 14:39:00 -
[74] - Quote
Job Valador wrote:Me being the industrialist that i am would like too see the mining/harvesting bonuses. Hell for good measure (and if it possible too code) let it have buffs too build speeds, reaction speeds, and bp research and invention speed. chalk it up too being in the proximity of the black hole you gain insite on how stuff works or something. I know I would fight tooth and nail too have a lab in a black hole if this was the case.
Not this, bonuses to things that require you to leave POS bubbles to use please. |
Naomi Quaid
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 16:00:00 -
[75] - Quote
I never lived in a wormhole and my toon is only one year old, so correct me if i say somthing wrong here: We're talking here about black holes right? I mean we have on object which causes a constant pull on all objects in its vicinity towards the event horizon. Wouldn't it be logical to just nerf the speed of ships, missiles, drones and the weapon accuracy? I mean ships/missiles/drones have always to correct their course. So the bigger the ship, the lower the nerf (more powerful engines on bigger ships).
And since a black hole's gravity affects everything (even light) weapon systems (all of them: projectiles, beams, hybrids) would loose some of their accuracy. At least in my opinion that would be in conformity to every-day scifi-logic. As for buffs in general i have no idea how to do it. I'll let more expirienced players do the ritings here. |
Haseo Antares
Corollary Forest Fairytail.
53
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 16:46:00 -
[76] - Quote
Naomi Quaid wrote:I never lived in a wormhole and my toon is only one year old, so correct me if i say somthing wrong here: We're talking here about black holes right? I mean we have on object which causes a constant pull on all objects in its vicinity towards the event horizon. Wouldn't it be logical to just nerf the speed of ships, missiles, drones and the weapon accuracy? I mean ships/missiles/drones have always to correct their course. So the bigger the ship, the lower the nerf (more powerful engines on bigger ships). And since a black hole's gravity affects everything (even light) weapon systems (all of them: projectiles, beams, hybrids) would loose some of their accuracy. At least in my opinion that would be in conformity to every-day scifi-logic. As for buffs in general i have no idea how to do it. I'll let more expirienced players do the ritings here.
I don't think the black holes are actually located within the system boundaries. I have always thought that these black hole systems were close enough to the black hole(s?) to experience significant gravitational pull but far away enough from the event horizon to "exist" in its current state. We currently have the world's greatest linguists and scientists trying to decode whatn++ you just said. |
chris elliot
EG CORP Mass Overload
221
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 16:56:00 -
[77] - Quote
Why not give Black Holes the armor nerf penalties from a pulsar as well as the shield nerfs from a wolf. Them give them local active rep amount/cap use bonus'. Then have it nerf ecm range/effectiveness so you are less likely to get jammed.
Think of it as an inverted Cataclysmic Variable.
CCP keeps tacking on these horrible active rep bonuses to ships, might as well have one place in the game where they do sorta kinda not suck really bad.
|
Tesoni Daven
BENEVOLENC3 Wormhole Kaleidoscope Alliance
9
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 17:39:00 -
[78] - Quote
Giving them a double static would be an awsome effect, but failing that I'd like too see bonuses that encourage more battleship/BC brawling, and lean away from the Dread blapping, T3 blopping of damn near every other WH, but without completely crippling isk farming.
Possibilities (in a C6, scaled down for lower-class WHs) +100% to Siege Module duration
I see this effect as a way too discourage using dreads and triage carriers, without comepletely crippling them. Pretty much just brings the risk/reward of using them more in line with the massive combat multiplier they provide in WH space. The longer siege timers mean that, when used, they are commited too the field for much longer, and also makes it so that there are longer periods of time between when your carriers can cap up and rep your dreads.
+80% to Large turret tracking
This bonus is present too simply narrow the gap between T3 and BS damage application. Between this bonus, and the reduction in the effectiveness of blapping, it should make close range BSs far more attractive as DPS ships.
+80% to explosion velocity of cruise missiles and torpedoes
Same as above.
-50% mass of all ships
This will make it somewhat harder too collapse WHs, but, again, it encourages the use of BSs since now they will put substantialy less of a dent in WH mass limits. Also makes blackholes more attractive too aggressive PvP corps. More fights more fun!
-75% effectiveness of Target painters
Again, helps kill dread blapping, but shouldn't be much of an issue for PvPing in BSs (due too the crazy tracking large guns will have), and also won't effect PvE terribly much.
-50% to efficiency of capital remote armor repairers and capital remote shield boosters
Too keep these WHs from just being a competition between who can bring the most carriers |
chris elliot
EG CORP Mass Overload
221
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 18:05:00 -
[79] - Quote
Tesoni Daven wrote:
+80% to Large turret tracking
This bonus is present too simply narrow the gap between T3 and BS damage application. Between this bonus, and the reduction in the effectiveness of blapping, it should make close range BSs far more attractive as DPS ships.
+80% to explosion velocity of cruise missiles and torpedoes
Same as above.
-50% mass of all ships
This will make it somewhat harder too collapse WHs, but, again, it encourages the use of BSs since now they will put substantialy less of a dent in WH mass limits. Also makes blackholes more attractive too aggressive PvP corps. More fights more fun!
-75% effectiveness of Target painters
Again, helps kill dread blapping, but shouldn't be much of an issue for PvPing in BSs (due too the crazy tracking large guns will have), and also won't effect PvE terribly much.
-50% to efficiency of capital remote armor repairers and capital remote shield boosters
Too keep these WHs from just being a competition between who can bring the most carriers
This would make Talos fleets REDICULOUSLY overpowered in these holes. Well.... any tier3 fleet would ridiculous with those bonuses.
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
10
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 19:27:00 -
[80] - Quote
It occurs to me that having a bonus to repair range would compliment the speed nicely and remove one of the main issues with said speed bonus.
Not suggesting we keep all the current effects but this could be an interesting new one if the speed stays. |
|
dark dreamur
Whale Girth Disavowed.
35
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 19:42:00 -
[81] - Quote
what about an affect to cloaking most other aspects or ship systems are affeced by worm holes be it sig radius armour stats, shield stats, it might be fun opening up a system not knowing an entire fleet is cloaked in there, maybe a reduction to lock times after de cloak or a warp bonus to ships that dont have the use of a covert ops cloak, could potentionally lead to small gang or solo pvp, the other possibility which im pretty sure you would all hate would be a bonus to ecm , tracking disruption and sensor damping, ok maybe not the ecm bonus, that i would get hung for im sure the other side of the coin could be a bonus to remote sensor boosting and other friendly projected effects
basicly id like to see an effect that dosnt make it easier to farm isk and encourages pvp away from guardian armour t3 standard
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
11
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 21:00:00 -
[82] - Quote
dark dreamur wrote:basicly id like to see an effect that dosnt make it easier to farm isk and encourages pvp away from guardian armour t3 standard
This is less a wormhole effects problem and more of an armor/shield balance problem. Tweaking one set of wormhole effects isn't really going to change that.
Besides we've already got Pulsars for shield friendly stuff.
Plus I think anything that isn't at least somewhat competitive with other effects for PvE as well as PvP will see these ignored as much as they are now. |
Kynric
Sky Fighters Mass Overload
16
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 21:21:00 -
[83] - Quote
Blackholes dont have to be a nice place to live to still be relevant. We fight where we can find it. I would like them to stay as a pretty terrible place to fight, if anything make them more terrible. Terrible can be interesting. Compensate them in non tactical ways such as additional periodics, more gas, faster rock mining or some other trait like a different maximum range for the dscanner. The last thing we need is yet another way to farm red crosses just a bit faster; these systems need not compete for that title to still be interesting. |
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Transmission Lost
45
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 21:59:00 -
[84] - Quote
Godfrey Silvarna wrote:Archdaimon wrote:How bout making black holes _the_ place for small ships to fight.
That is give bonuses and penalties compared to size of ship. Hence huge tracking penalties to caps, less to bs etc., but almost none to frigs (maybe even bonus?)
This would make c5/6 systems where _not_ cap pilots could live and fights with out fearing the blob-blap-dreads.
I am starting to really like this idea. Aren't magnetars already doing this? Or was it wolf rayet?
Anyway i realy like this idea :
Sushi Nardieu wrote:Interdiction bubble size: Make bubbles huge in this system. HICs and DICs included. A downside might be increased cycle time or something like that. This should not affect anchored bubbles because it could get abused. [/qoute] But reading the problem CCP have with pos bubbles, could make this idea a technical nightmare... .
This might be the easiest one to do and would turn them into a do or die type of hole : [quote=Jack Miton]Just change the agility penalty to an agility buff and youre done. Go faster but at better agility with range reduction on guns seems fine to me. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
11
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 22:59:00 -
[85] - Quote
Kynric wrote:Blackholes dont have to be a nice place to live to still be relevant. We fight where we can find it. I would like them to stay as a pretty terrible place to fight, if anything make them more terrible. Terrible can be interesting. Compensate them in non tactical ways such as additional periodics, more gas, faster rock mining or some other trait like a different maximum range for the dscanner. The last thing we need is yet another way to farm red crosses just a bit faster; these systems need not compete for that title to still be interesting.
The problem I see with this is that those red crosses are one of the primary drivers of conflict in W-space. If you're rolling your static looking for stuff to do and you jump through into a Black Hole and everyone knows they suck then why would you bother? There's less chance of finding a fight and less money to be made.
If you can make tons of money then great, that can compensate for the terrible attributes but if I know this game then that will more than likely catapult Black Holes into amazing farming places as soon as someone finds a way around those negatives at which point we're back to shooting red crosses. |
Robert Morningstar
Morningstar Excavations LTD Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
9
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 23:16:00 -
[86] - Quote
Items that would make sense for me as a Black Hole effect
Random static (in other words it has a static that works like any other static in respawn except that one day the static may be a b274 the next a n766 next day a null etc
Time dilation should actually slow down time so 1/2 normal speed not 2*
perhaps have the time dilation effect the static longevity
turret tracking would be worse not better (turrets have to adjust for the changing gravity over trajectory)
same with missile explosion velocity (part of the energy is being pulled toward the bh sol less damage especially to smaller targets
then finally yes the web should have a bonus but not good enough to counter the hit to turrent tracking as it applies to dreds |
Longinius Spear
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
163
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 23:30:00 -
[87] - Quote
I like the idea of a worm hole being a 'wild card'.
You could adjust the bonuses, but no alteration of the current BH effects (other than removing them) will make anyone want to fight in them.
I think removing the effect entirely and making the hole normal is a cheap way to 'fix them'.
If you wanted to go nuts and create special rules for those holes.. I say make their statics totally random. Time open, type and mass of connection, just totally random.
But no matter what you do, please remove the current effects on blackholes.. cause they are bad.
Co-host of Down the Pipe Podcast Read more of my ramblings on my blog Invading Your Hole
|
jonnykefka
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
228
|
Posted - 2013.08.10 01:42:00 -
[88] - Quote
So here's a thing about the incoming HAC rebalance: They are all designed to fight from medium-to-long range.
Wormholes are not, generally speaking, well-configured for that.
It would be interesting to have a set of bonuses that encouraged long-range fighting in w-space, forcing different fleet comps the same way that Pulsars or Wolf Rayets do (or to a lesser degree, Cat Vars).
Someone early in the thread talked about a missile velocity bonus. Let's go all-in on range boost using come combination of the below:
Missile/bomb velocity Optimal and falloff Targeting range Point (but NOT web) range, possibly including HICs but that might get broken in a hurry
Offset by: Tracking penalty Explosion radius and/or velocity penalty Some kind of penalty that makes the optimal bonuses not boost knife-fighting proteii to a stupid degree...pity there's no enforceable minimum range MWD sig bloom penalty maybe? I have mixed feels about that as an idea, I'm just putting it out there.
On further inspection I believe that the above listed bonuses and penalties are largely crap (except the point range one), so I'm going to go with the broad idea and let smarter people fill in the implementation: Create an environment where, especially at the higher class WHs, it is better and indeed almost required to fight at 30-50km instead of the usual brawl-at-zero-on-the-hole.
Alternately go the other direction and swap maneuvering and speed: Make everything slow but handle really well. Hilarious. |
Phoenix Jones
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
147
|
Posted - 2013.08.10 04:22:00 -
[89] - Quote
Blackholes should have 3 effects
1) reduces all resistance by 5/10/15/20/25/30% 2) Increases all shield and armor hit points by 5/10/15/20/25/30% 3) reduces structure by 15/30/45/60/75/90% 4) reduces capacitor amount (total capacitor) by 3/6/9/12/15/18% 5) reduces heat damage by 10/20/30/40/50/60% 6) increases inertia by 12/24/36/48/60/72%
Stabbers are totally broken
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15116553
|
Jack Tronic
borkedLabs
125
|
Posted - 2013.08.10 05:17:00 -
[90] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:Blackholes should have 3 effects
1) reduces all resistance by 5/10/15/20/25/30% 2) Increases all shield and armor hit points by 5/10/15/20/25/30% 3) reduces structure by 15/30/45/60/75/90% 4) reduces capacitor amount (total capacitor) by 3/6/9/12/15/18% 5) reduces heat damage by 10/20/30/40/50/60% 6) increases inertia by 12/24/36/48/60/72%
I'm confused how this affects anything other than making nano pvp even more hilarious. |
|
Kel hound
Lycosa Syndicate Surely You're Joking
49
|
Posted - 2013.08.10 05:50:00 -
[91] - Quote
Black Holes are supposed to be all about the movement right? So why not tailor the effects to cater to skirmish fleets.
(effects given for C6, adjust as necessary for other wormhole class)
Bonus to Gun Optimal and falloff - 2.0 Bonus to Missile Velocity and Explosion Velocity - 2.0 Bonus to Drone Control and Dron Velocity - 2.0 Penalty to Gun Tracking - 0.5 Penalty to Explosion Radius - 0.5 Penalty to Drone Tracking - 0.5
Bonus to AB / MWD Velocity - 2.0 Bonus to Ship Velocity - 1.25
In short, everyone can move faster, hit further - but the trade off is tracking.
Alternatively I love the idea of making black holes the antithesis cataclysmic variables.
Armor repair amount multiplier 2.00 Shield repair amount multiplier 2.00 Shield transfer amount multiplier 0.50 Remote repair amount multiplier 0.50 Capacitor capacity multiplier 0.75 Capacitor recharge time multiplier 0.50
Basically a reduction in total capacitor, but a massive boost to capacitor recharge time and a large boost to local repairs.
|
Trinkets friend
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
1086
|
Posted - 2013.08.10 09:57:00 -
[92] - Quote
Quote:Alternatively I love the idea of making black holes the antithesis cataclysmic variables.
Armor repair amount multiplier 2.00 Shield repair amount multiplier 2.00 Shield transfer amount multiplier 0.50 Remote repair amount multiplier 0.50 Capacitor capacity multiplier 0.75 Capacitor recharge time multiplier 0.50
Basically a reduction in total capacitor, but a massive boost to capacitor recharge time and a large boost to local repairs.
That would be interesting for triage and siege. It would really make Black Hole systems popular for C5-6 escalation farmers, as their dreads and carriers would be essentially uber tanking all the things, coasting out, and collecting loot pinata.
The tradeoff to this, of course, would be that it would affect the fleets and fits of people farming and PVPing in lower-end wormholes. This would be countered, possibly, by capacitor warfare, which would be super effective at knocking down the weak capacitor of all the active-tanked ships we would see fielded in the Black Holes.
Cap battery XLASB Maelstroms would be a thing, finally, like we always wanted.
It has its merits, but it is also open to wild, wild exploitation by crystals, drugs, boosters, the new m odules, the oncoming buff to repairer boost amounts, etc etc etc. It would, in short, result in ridicutanked everything, all the time.
Oh, right, I forgot; you don't need to do anything except whine that you can't fit and fly ships properly in Black Holes, so of course this would be horrible...right, Cade Windstalker? YOLO is the Carpe Diem of Gen Y http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
11
|
Posted - 2013.08.10 10:32:00 -
[93] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:That would be interesting for triage and siege. It would really make Black Hole systems popular for C5-6 escalation farmers, as their dreads and carriers would be essentially uber tanking all the things, coasting out, and collecting loot pinata.
No, this would be horrible for C5/6 escalations because the weak point isn't the sieged capitals, it's the support fleet that the triage carrier needs to keep alive. I once heard a friend describe it as a walk in the park for the dread while the carrier plays whack-a-mole with cruiser HP bars on the support ships.
Trinkets friend wrote:The tradeoff to this, of course, would be that it would affect the fleets and fits of people farming and PVPing in lower-end wormholes. This would be countered, possibly, by capacitor warfare, which would be super effective at knocking down the weak capacitor of all the active-tanked ships we would see fielded in the Black Holes.
If anything this would benefit smaller gangs or solo-boats using local-tank in C3 and below holes. Limiting remote repair hurts C4 and up more than C3 and below because you need the RR to do those sites where as in a C3 you can get by with a well skilled BC or T3 fairly easily.
Trinkets friend wrote:It has its merits, but it is also open to wild, wild exploitation by crystals, drugs, boosters, the new m odules, the oncoming buff to repairer boost amounts, etc etc etc. It would, in short, result in ridicutanked everything, all the time.
As opposed to logi-supported gangs? You can, with dedicated logistics boats, tank far far more than you can with even a 2x bonus to local reps.
Trinkets friend wrote:navigation stuff and personal attacks
You listed off a relatively small list of very specific examples, all of which only apply to specific PvP environments, as opposed to, as someone else in this thread put it, the "brawl at 0 on the hole" philosophy of wormhole PvP.
You bring sensor damps, I bring Sebo's. You bring fast ships I bring bonused webs. Everything has a counter, playing "specific hypothetical situation" is a **** way to balance a global wormhole effect. You can probably find a super specific example to counter almost every effect they could apply but unless a Black Hole is a fun place for most people to PvP and PvE then they're going to remain Wormhole Space backwaters with very little going on in them. |
Oxandrolone
Bite Me inc Bitten.
217
|
Posted - 2013.08.10 11:10:00 -
[94] - Quote
How about something completely different such as a manufacturing bonus?
Should be easy enough to work into the lore. The huge gravity from a BH makes combining alloty easier (high pressure reduces all this kind of crap)
I dont do manufacturing personally but it will bring some industrialists into wh's.
Some kind of mining / reprocessing bonus Ship building bonus Less POS fuel needed in towers Bonus to research
It's not mu job to come up with specifics but I think manufacturing wh will make them worth fighting for in the high end and beneficial to have in the C1-C3 range with easy access to k-space. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
11
|
Posted - 2013.08.10 11:16:00 -
[95] - Quote
Oxandrolone wrote:How about something completely different such as a manufacturing bonus?
Should be easy enough to work into the lore. The huge gravity from a BH makes combining alloty easier (high pressure reduces all this kind of crap)
I dont do manufacturing personally but it will bring some industrialists into wh's.
Some kind of mining / reprocessing bonus Ship building bonus Less POS fuel needed in towers Bonus to research
It's not mu job to come up with specifics but I think manufacturing wh will make them worth fighting for in the high end and beneficial to have in the C1-C3 range with easy access to k-space.
The problem I see with this is that it doesn't really benefit wormhole space, it benefits people in K-space who move in to a wormhole and then do almost nothing but build stuff there which they then export to K-space.
Plus most industrialists will likely do the math on potential losses and "nope" right back to high-sec where their manufacturing is hard to touch. |
Sushi Nardieu
Bite Me inc Bitten.
153
|
Posted - 2013.08.10 14:32:00 -
[96] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:
The problem I see with this is that it doesn't really benefit wormhole space, it benefits people in K-space who move in to a wormhole and then do almost nothing but build stuff there which they then export to K-space.
Plus most industrialists will likely do the math on potential losses and "nope" right back to high-sec where their manufacturing is hard to touch.
On the other hand, all new activity benefits W-space. It does not matter what that activity is one of the nice things about new features and changes is that they encourage adaptation from the current player base.
It would be a failure to W-space if no one was interested in this system effect.
The balance and key to the industry effect will be exactly: High Sec VS Wormhole Bonus
So maybe in the end, High Sec industry will need to be evaluated and balanced before an industry effect WH bonus be introduced. The Guns of Knowledge-á |
Nix Anteris
Bite Me inc Bitten.
124
|
Posted - 2013.08.10 15:38:00 -
[97] - Quote
I would like to re-state (in caps, because you know, cruise control for cool)
BLACK HOLES DO NOT NEED TO BE CHANGED
IT IS OK TO HAVE UNDESIRABLE EFFECTS
IF PEOPLE WANT DESIRABLE WORMHOLES THEY SHOULD HAVE TO FIGHT FOR THEM
Now that's cleared up, I'm going to start my own space MMO, with blackjack, and hookers! ... oh wait :x |
ExookiZ
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
73
|
Posted - 2013.08.10 16:27:00 -
[98] - Quote
I tend to agree with Nix, Black holes dont need to be "fixed". I find the industrial effects interesting but I am not sure how beneficial that would be.
In general black holes are devoid of life and serve as WH hubs, whenever we roll into a black hole we know 2 things. 1. It is probably empty and full of relic/data/gas sites and so provides potential ganks for people running them. 2. It likely has a pile of outgoing K spaces waiting to be opened. Thus serving our logistical needs for that day if we are lucky.
I like these facts, I dont know why everone thinks every wormhole needs to benefit them in special ways. If anything their bonuses ahve led them to evovle into a system with its own unique purpose in WHs and i find that better than half the other stupid wh effects. |
Tesoni Daven
BENEVOLENC3 Wormhole Kaleidoscope Alliance
9
|
Posted - 2013.08.10 22:53:00 -
[99] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Trinkets friend wrote:That would be interesting for triage and siege. It would really make Black Hole systems popular for C5-6 escalation farmers, as their dreads and carriers would be essentially uber tanking all the things, coasting out, and collecting loot pinata. No, this would be horrible for C5/6 escalations because the weak point isn't the sieged capitals, it's the support fleet that the triage carrier needs to keep alive. I once heard a friend describe it as a walk in the park for the dread while the carrier plays whack-a-mole with cruiser HP bars on the support ships.
I'm not sure you've done capital escalations. T3s are laughably easy too keep alive in cap escalations. A 2 TP, 3 web Loki can easily rock 120k+ armor EHP if properly pimped, and still cost less than what can be made back in 2 sites. Add slaves and maxed skills and it gets a bit outrageous. The sig tanking and resist make it so that none of the hits are more than a few hundred damage, against a double plated tank that's nothing. The capitals absolutely take more damage due too not sig tanking at all, and not being able too receive remote reps in siege. Also, they rock relatively low resists typically in order too maximize cap recharge and damage mods. |
Angsty Teenager
Broski North Black Legion.
173
|
Posted - 2013.08.11 03:46:00 -
[100] - Quote
The way I look at black holes is that in comparison to the other wormhole types, they provide no advantage for any sort of setup, only disadvantages. That is to say this:
Pulsar: Favors using shield Wolf-rayet: Favors using armor Red Giant: Favors the use of smartbombs and potentially overload Magnetar: Used to favor the use of EWAR (and it still should tbh, need to look at this as well) Cataclysmic: Favors the use of RR and teamplay
Black Hole: Favors nothing
I suppose the intent was that it was to favor kiting/speed based setups, but the issue that the inertia nerf makes that impossible because kiting is all about range control not just pure speed and range. Furthermore, the nerfs to damage projection and targeting range make kiting unfavorable, leaving the wormhole a place for close range speed brawling (???) which really makes no sense and has no place in the current meta.
While these effects could just be adjusted to make the wormhole in line with the rest, I think that that approach is a little bit trite and wormholes deserve some more interesting mechanics. As mentioned earlier in this thread, I think the idea of having multiple statics in black holes, and a lack of moons would be really neat. Instead of making the wormhole "effects" actual effects on your ship, make it effects on the environment of the system. Make moons non-existant, make static spawning less predictable, give it a random static, random number of statics, or even give it a propensity towards being opened into.
It would be very cool to have black holes be "hub" wormhole systems where at any time there are 20-30 wormholes of all classes opened into these holes, would potentially allow for more "top belt in amamake" style fights, which would be really neat.
|
|
Casirio
Obstergo Bitten.
486
|
Posted - 2013.08.11 04:15:00 -
[101] - Quote
if we are talking about multiple statics or "hub" wh then leave the undesirable effects and/or no moons. has to have a trade off. |
Kel hound
Lycosa Syndicate Surely You're Joking
49
|
Posted - 2013.08.11 05:14:00 -
[102] - Quote
Casirio wrote:if we are talking about multiple statics or "hub" wh then leave the undesirable effects and/or no moons. has to have a trade off.
Actually were supposed to be talking about a change to the wormhole effects. A drastic change to black hole systems such as the removal of moons or the addition of one or more static connections would fall outside the purview of the original topic.
Nix Anteris wrote:BLACK HOLES DO NOT NEED TO BE CHANGED
IT IS OK TO HAVE UNDESIRABLE EFFECTS
IF PEOPLE WANT DESIRABLE WORMHOLES THEY SHOULD HAVE TO FIGHT FOR THEM
Sushi Nardieu wrote:It would be a failure to W-space if no one was interested in this system effect.
Blackholes, even lower end wormholes, are abandoned. People -do- fight for desirable wormholes, but nobody fights for undesirable wormholes. Any beneficial change to wormholes will inevitably result in more content for all of us.
Trinkets friend wrote:It has its merits, but it is also open to wild, wild exploitation by crystals, drugs, boosters, the new m odules, the oncoming buff to repairer boost amounts, etc etc etc. It would, in short, result in ridicutanked everything, all the time.
All the wormhole effects are open to some level of abuse, I believe that is kind of the point. Wormhole effects are there to promote lateral thinking, they are there to give a unique home field advantage. In the case of a polar opposite cataclysmic variable this would relatively balanced. Yes, you could possibly run an epic perma tank, but you would also leave yourself wide open to capacitor warfare. Guess what Sleepers specialise in... |
Kalel Nimrott
Sky Fighters Mass Overload
362
|
Posted - 2013.08.11 05:23:00 -
[103] - Quote
I would change to they having an effect over the Wormholes themselve. For example a H296 having up to an x% in their duration or jumpable mass o maximun/minimun total mass. |
Trinkets friend
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
1086
|
Posted - 2013.08.11 05:35:00 -
[104] - Quote
Kel hound wrote: All the wormhole effects are open to some level of abuse, I believe that is kind of the point. Wormhole effects are there to promote lateral thinking, they are there to give a unique home field advantage. In the case of a polar opposite cataclysmic variable this would relatively balanced. Yes, you could possibly run an epic perma tank, but you would also leave yourself wide open to capacitor warfare. Guess what Sleepers specialise in...
Guess what ASB's specialise in: total immunity to capacitor warfare. I accept your point, but we are talking about taking a Maelstrom from a 1200 DPS tank to a 2400 DPS tank in a C6. Without really going overboard on the pimp.
This would be quite similar for every other possible thing, ever. Instead of Guardians RRing you, they'd turn back into pre-Retribution Augorors; energy creation engines feeding capacitor into beastly local tanks. Guardians would become the anti cap warfare to fight the cap warfare.
You can also fit geno's or capacitor implants and/or a cap booster, if the sleeper neuting is a problem.
Kel Hound wrote: Blackholes, even lower end wormholes, are abandoned. People -do- fight for desirable wormholes, but nobody fights for undesirable wormholes. Any beneficial change to wormholes will inevitably result in more content for all of us.
This is not true. I am sure CCP knows the truth of this (or someone can search out the black holes and do stats on which have been ratted consistently in the last month) but most black holes I encounter are inhabited in C1 to C4. C5's, it's 50/50. haven't visited one of the C6 black holes in over a year, so cannot say.
That they aren't being fought over doesn't mean no one is living in them.
Like I said to Windstalker, people need to adapt. it is possible and indeed beneficial to adapt to Black Hole life up to C4's; if someone like Windstalker comes for a visit and tried their 13km/s Dramiel on for fun you deal with them easily enough with a Maulus or two.
In C5's the drawbacks are so extreme that even the resident will find life ridiculous. Its not actually worth mutating your fit enough to gain an edge because it just ends up as munted as a normal fit which struggles with the targeting range.
Like I said I lived in a C4 black hole for 18 months. This is more than any of the rest of you have admitted to. its not easy, it takes some adjustment, but you can do it.
Windstalker wrote: Said more stuff that illuminates his ignorance
As for Windstalker....dude, you really have no idea about either black hole effects, or C5/C6 escalation. A dread, as mentioned by the other guy, will take a lot of DPS. But already they tank 4K DPS quite well. Since you'd be, well, you to drop a dread in C1-C4, we are talking traditionally about either an 85% boost to tank (C50 or 100% boost to local tank. So you'd be pulling 8K DPS tanks without sweating.
If this cannot be sustained permanently, you'd geno and implant up, toss a T2 CCC or a Charge Economiser rig on, and be able to run your 8K DPS tank for the few minutes necessary to tank while you spank the escalation over.
Not a problem for a Dread. For a triage carrier, your boost to local rep amount would assist you to tank plenty fine while you RR. Even a half-strength triage Archon will RR 1000 raw hitpoints a second.
in all honesty, you need to stop speaking from a position of ignorance either on wormholes in general, and with black holes in particular.
YOLO is the Carpe Diem of Gen Y http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
Phoenix Jones
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
148
|
Posted - 2013.08.11 06:18:00 -
[105] - Quote
The effect is crap, but changing it will only affect those living in it right now, and most likely in a bad way. Those two to three corps who decided to live there will have to redo everything.
This seems like a pointless venture. Address the issue of what makes a hole valuable, therefore a reason to take it over. Right now if someone gets evicted (or even just threatened), they move ship to a new hole. Wormholes themselves need to be more valuable.
The effect... Eh. Stabbers are totally broken
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15116553
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Polarized.
958
|
Posted - 2013.08.11 12:23:00 -
[106] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:The effect is crap, but changing it will only affect those living in it right now, and most likely in a bad way. Those two to three corps who decided to live there will have to redo everything.
This seems like a pointless venture. Address the issue of what makes a hole valuable, therefore a reason to take it over. Right now if someone gets evicted (or even just threatened), they move ship to a new hole. Wormholes themselves need to be more valuable.
The effect... Eh.
You know what, i agree with you. There is nothing wrong with having a system that some people find "less desirable".
Someone will use blackhole systems when we have enough people in W-space. Putting work in since 2010. |
Winthorp
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
177
|
Posted - 2013.08.11 12:25:00 -
[107] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Phoenix Jones wrote:The effect is crap, but changing it will only affect those living in it right now, and most likely in a bad way. Those two to three corps who decided to live there will have to redo everything.
This seems like a pointless venture. Address the issue of what makes a hole valuable, therefore a reason to take it over. Right now if someone gets evicted (or even just threatened), they move ship to a new hole. Wormholes themselves need to be more valuable.
The effect... Eh. You know what, i agree with you. There is nothing wrong with having a system that some people find "less desirable". Someone will use blackhole systems when we have enough people in W-space.
A full w-space coming to eve in 2036. |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
70
|
Posted - 2013.08.11 12:28:00 -
[108] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:The effect is crap, but changing it will only affect those living in it right now, and most likely in a bad way. Those two to three corps who decided to live there will have to redo everything.
This seems like a pointless venture. Address the issue of what makes a hole valuable, therefore a reason to take it over. Right now if someone gets evicted (or even just threatened), they move ship to a new hole. Wormholes themselves need to be more valuable.
The effect... Eh.
I got it! Each wormhole in the game should have the chance to spawn its own J### sleeper. This special sleeper drops some sort of item (a gun, a tanky thing, something) but the item is unique to your wh! Perhaps you get parts that need to be combined with some salvaged components also unique to your wh or maybe a small group of whs, giving you the module. In any case, that defiantly makes you want to hold a specific whs and gives you more of a sense of ownership for that hole. A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver. |
Nix Anteris
Bite Me inc Bitten.
131
|
Posted - 2013.08.11 15:39:00 -
[109] - Quote
I said previously that I think it's fine to keep BHs the way they are. However since this thread is about changes, not about not-changes, lets have a stab at this.
Black holes have their effects due to that giant environmental anomaly - the black hole. Lets keep this in mind with our changes.
Inertia, ship speed and weapon accuracy being screwed make sense, you have a bit o' extra gravity tugging on your ship and your projectiles. The way the weapon accuracy is done bothers me a bit though.
Keep +Ship velocity and +Inertia, tweak the values a bit perhaps, but definitely keep them. Could be as simple as C1 = 10% and C6 = 60%, makes it nice and easy to remember.
Now, would gravity affect Lock Range and Drone Control Range. No, it would not. Lose these bonuses.
Would gravity affect Missile Velocity and Falloff Range negatively? No, it wouldn't, it would actually increase them, so keep these bonuses but turn them into positives instead of negatives.
But the accuracy has to go down somehow. Versus players with their increased speed this will happen naturally with tracking/explosion velocity, but to cover the full spectrum, Sleepers also need to have the velocity and inertia bonuses applied to them.
Lastly we need 2 more bonuses to cover the Lock Range + Drone Control Range we lost.
How about Bonus to Energy Transfer and Energy Neutraliser amount as arbitrary effects (whether this should also apply to sleepers up for debate - probably shouldn't).
This leaves us with: +Ship Velocity (Now affects sleepers) +Inertia (Now affects sleepers) +Missile Velocity (changed from -Missile Velocity) +Falloff (changed from -Falloff) +Energy Transfer Amount +Energy Neutraliser Amount
An alternative could be some other "stuff" related to gravity, stuff you need the Graviton Physics skill for, stuff like bonuses to interdiction bubble sizes. (If you're travelling twice as fast, a double sized bubble would be like a normal bubble, right?!)
In reality you should never be able to stop your ship in a BH system, since you would always be pulled towards the black hole. (POS shields would need some special nanotech to counter this though) |
Keith Planck
League of Extraordinary Equines Disciples of Vectron
517
|
Posted - 2013.08.11 20:11:00 -
[110] - Quote
Time dilation if its possible, would be amazing. How much, who knows \o/
If not then how about you flip some of the effects.
Faster Missile Velocity Slower Ship Velocity Reduced Drone control Range Decreased Inertia Reduced Lock Range Increased Falloff
So: Missiles fly farther Your ship moves slower You have reduced drone control range Your ship has less agility You can't target as far But you have increased falloff
Another Idea, make it the opposite of a magnetar:
Decreased Damage Increased Tracking Reduced ship speed Increased Falloff Reduced lock range reduced drone control range |
|
Oxandrolone
Bite Me inc Bitten.
217
|
Posted - 2013.08.11 20:42:00 -
[111] - Quote
Well hopefully amongst the shitposting and lists of terrible ideas (mine probably included) a GM can pull something semi-worthwhile from this thread. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
11
|
Posted - 2013.08.11 23:59:00 -
[112] - Quote
Tesoni Daven wrote:[quote=Cade Windstalker]I'm not sure you've done capital escalations. T3s are laughably easy too keep alive in cap escalations. A 2 TP, 3 web Loki can easily rock 120k+ armor EHP if properly pimped, and still cost less than what can be made back in 2 sites. Add slaves and maxed skills and it gets a bit outrageous. The sig tanking and resist make it so that none of the hits are more than a few hundred damage, against a double plated tank that's nothing. The capitals absolutely take more damage due too not sig tanking at all, and not being able too receive remote reps in siege. Also, they rock relatively low resists typically in order too maximize cap recharge and damage mods.
I was actually thinking of an Ashimu/Rapier or Loki setup a friend showed me that was pretty ridiculous. You're definitely right that T3s would be easier to keep alive.
On the subject of Sieged dreads and carriers, wouldn't a local rep bonus affecting them make dread-blap PvP all the more ridiculous since the dreads would be harder to deal with for a sub-cap only fleet? |
Nimrod vanHall
Martyr's Vengence Test Alliance Please Ignore
23
|
Posted - 2013.08.12 01:36:00 -
[113] - Quote
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:make it have 2x time dilation
IE everything happens at twice the speed
seriously that would be a cool wormhole to live in... Wouldn't that also mean 2x skill gain speed? |
Jack Miton
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
2241
|
Posted - 2013.08.12 03:06:00 -
[114] - Quote
Nimrod vanHall wrote:Warde Guildencrantz wrote:make it have 2x time dilation IE everything happens at twice the speed seriously that would be a cool wormhole to live in... Wouldn't that also mean 2x skill gain speed? you don't really know what tidi is do you?
|
John Bishop
Potentially Irresponsible Wormhole Pikeys
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.12 07:36:00 -
[115] - Quote
have the black hole actually be in the system and not just a pretty back ground. the closer you get to it the worse effects you have. too close and you become trapped and eventually die....
you would have to pay attention to your line of sight so that you dont warp through the BH. warping towards the center of the system you would move faster. warping away you'd move slower. same as on the battlefield.
close to the even horizon youd start taking damage from radiation itself but sites in this area would be the most lucrative in system.
the more massive the ships the greater the effects too, lending smaller ships an edge, especially near the even horizon. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
11
|
Posted - 2013.08.12 11:04:00 -
[116] - Quote
John Bishop wrote:have the black hole actually be in the system and not just a pretty back ground. the closer you get to it the worse effects you have. too close and you become trapped and eventually die....
you would have to pay attention to your line of sight so that you dont warp through the BH. warping towards the center of the system you would move faster. warping away you'd move slower. same as on the battlefield.
close to the even horizon youd start taking damage from radiation itself but sites in this area would be the most lucrative in system.
the more massive the ships the greater the effects too, lending smaller ships an edge, especially near the even horizon.
It was already said earlier that any changes would have to be relatively simple to implement, I don't think this qualifies >.> |
Phoenix Jones
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
152
|
Posted - 2013.08.12 11:15:00 -
[117] - Quote
Oxandrolone wrote:Well hopefully amongst the shitposting and lists of terrible ideas (mine probably included) a GM can pull something semi-worthwhile from this thread.
Hehe we've all have our good days and bad days :-) We do on occasion run into a black hole corporation (guys were running frigates at mega speeds).
I somehow don't think they minded the blackhole. If there hard-up at changing it though....
Stabbers are totally broken
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15116553
|
Tesoni Daven
BENEVOLENC3 Wormhole Kaleidoscope Alliance
9
|
Posted - 2013.08.13 01:42:00 -
[118] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Tesoni Daven wrote:[quote=Cade Windstalker]I'm not sure you've done capital escalations. T3s are laughably easy too keep alive in cap escalations. A 2 TP, 3 web Loki can easily rock 120k+ armor EHP if properly pimped, and still cost less than what can be made back in 2 sites. Add slaves and maxed skills and it gets a bit outrageous. The sig tanking and resist make it so that none of the hits are more than a few hundred damage, against a double plated tank that's nothing. The capitals absolutely take more damage due too not sig tanking at all, and not being able too receive remote reps in siege. Also, they rock relatively low resists typically in order too maximize cap recharge and damage mods. I was actually thinking of an Vigilant/Rapier or Loki setup a friend showed me that was pretty ridiculous. You're definitely right that T3s would be easier to keep alive. On the subject of Sieged dreads and carriers, wouldn't a local rep bonus affecting them make dread-blap PvP all the more ridiculous since the dreads would be harder to deal with for a sub-cap only fleet?
I have no idea why you would use a Vigi in sites to be honest. The web range is so terrible as too make it useless unless you are ABing around. Which I guess you can do, but seems like way more work than it is worth. Especially considering how much tank you lose compared too a Loki.
Rapier would work, but you would really need Recon V too make it worth it, and unless you are in a Pulsar, the tank is gonna be scary minimal.
And yah, any kind of local rep bonus that effects capital reps would make dreads even harder too kill. Which is probably not a good thing. |
Keith Planck
League of Extraordinary Equines Disciples of Vectron
517
|
Posted - 2013.08.13 05:43:00 -
[119] - Quote
BARE WITH ME
*Werid space spending stuffs 2000% bonus to cargo :X 50% reduction in reload time
It wouldn't make mining too OP since mining barges have the new ore holds.
But it would make running cap boosters or ancillary reps a lot easier? |
Nero Pantera
Whale Girth Disavowed.
5
|
Posted - 2013.08.13 11:11:00 -
[120] - Quote
c6 600% mining yield. Show Love to the miners too!!!!!! |
|
Phoenix Jones
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
159
|
Posted - 2013.08.13 13:51:00 -
[121] - Quote
Actually.. hehe oh this is an evil idea.
Massive Black Hole Effect. Causing the ripping of space to produce more wormholes.
1) Any wormhole connecting into or out of a Black hole now triples in mass based on the level of the wormhole its connecting to (meaning you could potentially jump battleships into a c1 by flying it from your wormhole, through a blackhole wormhole, then into the target system, or dreads into and out of c2-c4's). Also means that a C5/C6, you can jump in 6 to 8 dreads/carriers, vs the typical 2 to 3. Note: Kspace would get this boost, but no supercapitals or titans would be able to jump through it. 2) 72 hour connection (aka lasts 3 days once spawned). 3) Increase of random spawning of wormholes (meaning Black hole Wormholes receives and produces more random connections than a normal wormhole). Can potentially have anywhere from 6 to 20 different wormholes via a black hole effect. 4) Removal of the static signature of a black hole, that system is solely based on random holes (ALLOT of random holes)
An effect that turns the blackhole wormhole systems into a GIANT intersection might work. People would try to look for black holes just so they can use its size for raids, rights, moving large amounts of equipment, etc.
These holes are expected to be more of a place of transit than to live in, I would consider removing all moons from the black hole (Yes I know people currently live there, but there should be some corrective system for it).
Turn black holes into the wormhole transit hubs, allowing people to run sleeper sites, gas sites, etc in connecting holes with much less worry of there hole being collapsed upon. Random action from a black hole may encourage a bit more combat (and it would add more of a random factor, as people could potentially utilize black holes to find the home systems of certain people).
Black holes should be scary, allowing for allot of randomness, multiple wormhole spawns, and hunting, LOTS of hunting.
Stabbers are totally broken
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15116553
|
Terrorfrodo
Renegade Hobbits for Mordor
568
|
Posted - 2013.08.14 09:46:00 -
[122] - Quote
Phoenix's ideas sound promising... I had similar thoughts.
-increase mass of every wormhole connecting to or from a BH (allows more ships to travel, also makes closing harder) -increase number of wormholes (higher probability to meet active players, even more than two parties) -slightly nerf pve in BH's (e.g. by making sleepers faster, do more damage or have more hitpoints) -increase damage from POS weapons and/or POS hitpoints
The idea is that the system is unattractive for people to live there to do pve. Both because running the sites is slightly less efficient and because they get a lot more connections and visitors than other systems. Those who do choose to live in such a hole live there because they want to get a lot of people connecting to them to fight. In return it is a lot harder or at least annoying to evict them.
Few people would actually want to live in a BH, but even uninhabited ones could be hubs with lots of connecting groups, because they would both be harder to get rid of and also more attractive to stay connected to in terms of pvp.
It would be very important that people living in the BH have no control over what types of connections they have, otherwise farmers will move in to run sites in the connecting systems from a safe base. (But class should play a role; a c2 BH would mostly connect to c1-3, a c5 BH mostly to c4-6 etc.)
To this end BH's could be static-less. To ensure that they always have at least one exit, a wandering wormhole would always spawn if the last active hole connecting to the system collapses. I'm pretty sure a mechanic like that already exists to enforce the rule that every wormhole system has a k-space exit within five jumps (I observed new wandering nullsecs spawning in chains where the only k-space exit had just expired). . |
Phoenix Jones
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
160
|
Posted - 2013.08.14 14:38:00 -
[123] - Quote
Terrorfrodo wrote:Phoenix's ideas sound promising... I had similar thoughts.
-increase mass of every wormhole connecting to or from a BH (allows more ships to travel, also makes closing harder) -increase number of wormholes (higher probability to meet active players, even more than two parties) -slightly nerf pve in BH's (e.g. by making sleepers faster, do more damage or have more hitpoints) -increase damage from POS weapons and/or POS hitpoints
The idea is that the system is unattractive for people to live there to do pve. Both because running the sites is slightly less efficient and because they get a lot more connections and visitors than other systems. Those who do choose to live in such a hole live there because they want to get a lot of people connecting to them to fight. In return it is a lot harder or at least annoying to evict them.
Few people would actually want to live in a BH, but even uninhabited ones could be hubs with lots of connecting groups, because they would both be harder to get rid of and also more attractive to stay connected to in terms of pvp.
It would be very important that people living in the BH have no control over what types of connections they have, otherwise farmers will move in to run sites in the connecting systems from a safe base. (But class should play a role; a c2 BH would mostly connect to c1-3, a c5 BH mostly to c4-6 etc.)
To this end BH's could be static-less. To ensure that they always have at least one exit, a wandering wormhole would always spawn if the last active hole connecting to the system collapses. I'm pretty sure a mechanic like that already exists to enforce the rule that every wormhole system has a k-space exit within five jumps (I observed new wandering nullsecs spawning in chains where the only k-space exit had just expired).
I'm actually thinking much more basic. Literally turn it into a transit hub. It would be one of the places wormholers go to for pvp (lets say its the Rancer of wormhole space), it'd be one of the places wormholers go if they want to be a nomad (easy to find multiple connections to systems they want to go to, and entrances large enough to fit a fleet in, and take out, and ontop of it, have 2 to 3 days before it closes), it'd be the area's for those looking to do invasions, harassment, of other corps holes. Ontop of it, if a corporation wants to "role" their connecting black hole, they would either have to commit more ships to killing the mass, or commit more time to killing the hole.
Wormholes have a 10% deviation on mass when they are spawned, a wormhole 3 to 6 times its size due to the black hole effect should cause that deviation to be much more chaotic (or possibly simpler if you are good at math).
I'd probably increase the deviation of black hole wormholes by 2 to 3 fold (20 to 30% for more randomization, that and it forces people to really commit to closing a black hole wormhole connection). This specific area is a thought (concept that may or maynot be needed, depending on the math).
But wormholes may need actual "staging" systems, and black holes might be the answer to that. Stabbers are totally broken
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15116553
|
Puer Servus
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 00:17:00 -
[124] - Quote
Keep it simple.
Make Black Holes to give bonuses to missiles, velocity and penalty to turrets.
Max Velocity +25%, +44%, +55%, +68%, +85%, +100% Missile Explosion Velocity +25%, +44%, +55%, +68%, +85%, +100% Missile Explosion Radius -10%, -18%, -22%, -27%, -34%, -50% Weapon Signature Resolution +25%, +44%, +55%, +68%, +85%, +100% Weapon Optimal Range -10%, -19%, -27%, -34%, -41%, -50% Weapon Falloff -10%, -19%, -27%, -34%, -41%, -50% |
Marox Calendale
Human League Suicide-Commando
13
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 01:59:00 -
[125] - Quote
Leave the BH effect as it is right now. Remove all moons from them and reallocate them to C7 - C9 systems. Those systems won-¦t have any static or even an outgoing WH. There will only be random WH-¦s connecting to them.
Random WH from C1 or C2 will connect to C7. Random WH from C3 or C4 will connect to C8. Random WH from C5 or C6 will connect to C9.
Make them to PvP zones, but to offer more PvP you will need to encourage the greed of the carebears. Give it anything which is valuable to loose 4 or 5 T3-¦s or Caps, depending on its category, or maybe more valuable. But it should take a while to get it. Time and Mass also denpending on its category. Maybe give it parts to build a strategic outpost which can only get anchored in wormhole systems or something like that. Anything new which is worth to fight for. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
13
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 05:22:00 -
[126] - Quote
Marox Calendale wrote:Leave the BH effect as it is right now. Remove all moons from them and reallocate them to C7 - C9 systems. Those systems won-¦t have any static or even an outgoing WH. There will only be random WH-¦s connecting to them. Random WH from C1 or C2 will connect to C7. Random WH from C3 or C4 will connect to C8. Random WH from C5 or C6 will connect to C9. Make them to PvP zones, but to offer more PvP you will need to encourage the greed of the carebears. Give it anything which is valuable to loose 4 or 5 T3-¦s or Caps, depending on its category, or maybe more valuable. But it should take a while to get it. Time and Mass also denpending on its category. Maybe give it parts to build a strategic outpost which can only get anchored in wormhole systems or something like that. Anything new which is worth to fight for.
This falls pretty far outside the earlier note about simple ideas that are simple to implement. |
Afuran
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
24
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 08:13:00 -
[127] - Quote
I think they should be left alone. I also think that more systems should have 'difficult' effects and not all systems should be beneficial.
I'll never get over this 'this should be 'fixed' and 'that should be made easier for me' mentality that is prevalent in Eve.
This game is meant to present the harsh reality of space combat. There should be harsh environments to challenge people to adapt and thrive in areas where the noobs or the faint at heart don't dare to go.
Make the harsher environments more lucrative in line with Eve's isk vs risk model. Something like better PI, moon mining (what!?), more challenging sleepers (but more salvage/loot) - that kind of thing. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
13
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 08:40:00 -
[128] - Quote
Afuran wrote:I think they should be left alone. I also think that more systems should have 'difficult' effects and not all systems should be beneficial.
I'll never get over this 'this should be 'fixed' and 'that should be made easier for me' mentality that is prevalent in Eve.
This game is meant to present the harsh reality of space combat. There should be harsh environments to challenge people to adapt and thrive in areas where the noobs or the faint at heart don't dare to go.
Make the harsher environments more lucrative in line with Eve's isk vs risk model. Something like better PI, moon mining (what!?), more challenging sleepers (but more salvage/loot) - that kind of thing.
Except that black-holes as they stand right now aren't so much challenging areas worthy of in-creased reward, they're annoying as crap.
If you increased the rewards enough to compensate for the annoyance and time required you'd just end up buffing them and making them "easier" because as soon as people figure out how to adapt the danger and challenge is gone and the isk starts rolling in.
Plus, even though Eve Is Real, it's not terribly realistic. It's Science Fiction, so it's perfectly fine for the effects of a black-hole on our ship's systems to be somewhat fantastical. Hell, from a scientific perspective we don't have a terribly firm grasp on what conditions "near" a black-hole would even be like. Various other Sci-Fi authors just took a few rough ideas and ran with them. |
Janna Sway
20
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 11:29:00 -
[129] - Quote
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:make it have 2x time dilation
IE everything happens at twice the speed
seriously that would be a cool wormhole to live in...
in other words, 100% yield increase to ore and gas harvesting... |
Svodola Darkfury
Heaven's End League of Infamy
242
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 17:40:00 -
[130] - Quote
Afuran wrote:I think they should be left alone. I also think that more systems should have 'difficult' effects and not all systems should be beneficial.
I'll never get over this 'this should be 'fixed' and 'that should be made easier for me' mentality that is prevalent in Eve.
This game is meant to present the harsh reality of space combat. There should be harsh environments to challenge people to adapt and thrive in areas where the noobs or the faint at heart don't dare to go.
Make the harsher environments more lucrative in line with Eve's isk vs risk model. Something like better PI, moon mining (what!?), more challenging sleepers (but more salvage/loot) - that kind of thing.
The major problem with black holes is that the current Meta of doing sites is long-range boats; Black holes are designed around improving autocannon/pulse/blaster setups because their optimal/falloff don't really matter all that much and you get a massive speed bonus.
There's no reason for people to do sites twice as slow for the same pay when they can roll the connection and get a different wormhole with no effect/ANY OTHER EFFECT AT ALL and do sites there.
The problem right now is that black holes penalize every weapon system, AND YOUR AGILITY, and only give you a bonus to speed. In comparison with other systems where there is a good mix of benefit/drawback and some fringe cases (like Red Giants where it does nothing to PVE boats who don't smartbomb/overheat).
I think people are on the mark that it would be okay to penalize turrets and do a bonus to drones/missiles, or some combination in there-of. My suggestion would be to keep the Velocity but remove the inertia penalty, change the "lock range" to what it really is (optimal range), and add in a tracking BONUS and a missile explosion velocity bonus. Shorter range, but better tracking.
Svo. CEO of Heaven's End; Seller of Wormholes. |
|
Trinkets friend
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
1101
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 02:46:00 -
[131] - Quote
Svodola Darkfury wrote: The major problem with black holes is that the current Meta of doing sites is long-range boats; Black holes are designed around improving autocannon/pulse/blaster setups because their optimal/falloff don't really matter all that much and you get a massive speed bonus.
You are of course, completely wrong.
My Vaga: Optimal 1.8km, falloff 24km with Barrage.
C4 black hole 34% penalty to falloff results in...(drumroll) Optimal 1.8km, falloff 16km.
Oh, and you do understand how falloff works to reduce DPS? You're hitting 50% of your paper DPS at 17.8km instead of at 25.8km with the Vaga. Goodbye kiting.
This is the same for blasters with Null, pulses with Scorch. You are aware that faster speed = worse tracking? Even under webs, the black hole speed effects result in penalties to blaster boats. The Optimal on a blaster is 1.2 to 1.8km, and falloff is equally short; if you slice the Falloff on Blasters then you have to fight in Optimal.
So. Missile velocity -34% results in less range, but equal damage. Unless you are like Cade Windstalker and can't see this as, by default, a harder nerf to turrets than missiles...you haven't actually thought this through.
How is less damage at closer range a benefit to turrets and not to missiles? Name me one HML Drake or Tengu which is going to suffer having their missile range (of 72km) cut by a third, which is still well within dissy range...versus a Vaga which in a C4 BH can't even hit at kiting point range?
You people have obviously never fought in a BH. YOLO is the Carpe Diem of Gen Y http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
Haseo Antares
Corollary Forest Fairytail.
54
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 04:54:00 -
[132] - Quote
Instead of replacing the present environmental effects of black hole systems, how about something a bit unorthodox? Keep the present black hole effects but significantly reduce the penalties. In addition to that, have each black hole system mimic the environmental effects of a connected WH system...say the highest classed connection. We currently have the world's greatest linguists and scientists trying to decode whatn++ you just said. |
Kedv
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.16 17:17:00 -
[133] - Quote
Marox Calendale wrote:Leave the BH effect as it is right now. Remove all moons from them and reallocate them to C7 - C9 systems. Those systems won-¦t have any static or even an outgoing WH. There will only be random WH-¦s connecting to them. Random WH from C1 or C2 will connect to C7. Random WH from C3 or C4 will connect to C8. Random WH from C5 or C6 will connect to C9. Make them to PvP zones, but to offer more PvP you will need to encourage the greed of the carebears. Give it anything which is valuable to loose 4 or 5 T3-¦s or Caps, depending on its category, or maybe more valuable. But it should take a while to get it. Time and Mass also denpending on its category. Maybe give it parts to build a strategic outpost which can only get anchored in wormhole systems or something like that. Anything new which is worth to fight for. I thought C7, C8 and C9 equaled the kspace systems already? |
Majin Buu
Weee-Collect
2
|
Posted - 2013.08.18 20:44:00 -
[134] - Quote
Janna Sway wrote:Warde Guildencrantz wrote:make it have 2x time dilation
IE everything happens at twice the speed
seriously that would be a cool wormhole to live in... in other words, 100% yield increase to ore and gas harvesting...
Also earning skill points twice as fast while online and effected by the BH? |
Jonny Copper
Obstergo Bitten.
9
|
Posted - 2013.08.19 14:36:00 -
[135] - Quote
Kedv wrote: I thought C7, C8 and C9 equaled the kspace systems already?
Correct, C7 is Highsec, C8 is Lowsec and C9 is Nullsec. |
Kalel Nimrott
Sky Fighters
363
|
Posted - 2013.08.19 15:19:00 -
[136] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:Svodola Darkfury wrote: The major problem with black holes is that the current Meta of doing sites is long-range boats; Black holes are designed around improving autocannon/pulse/blaster setups because their optimal/falloff don't really matter all that much and you get a massive speed bonus.
You are of course, completely wrong. My Vaga: Optimal 1.8km, falloff 24km with Barrage. C4 black hole 34% penalty to falloff results in...(drumroll) Optimal 1.8km, falloff 16km. Oh, and you do understand how falloff works to reduce DPS? You're hitting 50% of your paper DPS at 17.8km instead of at 25.8km with the Vaga. Goodbye kiting. This is the same for blasters with Null, pulses with Scorch. You are aware that faster speed = worse tracking? Even under webs, the black hole speed effects result in penalties to blaster boats. The Optimal on a blaster is 1.2 to 1.8km, and falloff is equally short; if you slice the Falloff on Blasters then you have to fight in Optimal. So. Missile velocity -34% results in less range, but equal damage. Unless you are like Cade Windstalker and can't see this as, by default, a harder nerf to turrets than missiles...you haven't actually thought this through. How is less damage at closer range a benefit to turrets and not to missiles? Name me one HML Drake or Tengu which is going to suffer having their missile range (of 72km) cut by a third, which is still well within dissy range...versus a Vaga which in a C4 BH can't even hit at kiting point range? You people have obviously never fought in a BH.
Though I agree with on everything, you left something out. In black holes you can speed tank missiles a lot better. But overall, its a lot better than to hit nothing with your guns. |
Chamile Eonic
The Church of MDAMC
39
|
Posted - 2013.08.19 22:36:00 -
[137] - Quote
I know this isn't exactly what you want, but while on the subject.
Could the art team take a look at the Black Hole graphic? It could do with an update if they have any spare time. |
Trinkets friend
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
1106
|
Posted - 2013.08.20 00:49:00 -
[138] - Quote
Chamile Eonic wrote:I know this isn't exactly what you want, but while on the subject.
Could the art team take a look at the Black Hole graphic? It could do with an update if they have any spare time.
You mean you don't like the giant pulsating Goatse?
YOLO is the Carpe Diem of Gen Y http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
Keith Planck
League of Extraordinary Equines Disciples of Vectron
523
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 01:46:00 -
[139] - Quote
More Tracking Less Range (Lock Range, Drone Control, Missile Velocity, Falloff OR Optimal) More Speed Less Agility
So put simply, give it a bonus to tracking.
and
Also the range reduction effects could stand to do with a bit of a curb, right now black holes reduce falloff AND optimal which makes them pretty damning for PvE. |
300 jews
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 07:10:00 -
[140] - Quote
Simple solution. Give them a random effect other than a blackhole. BOOSH lame effects gone for eva |
|
G0hme
Hoover Inc. Black Legion.
126
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 14:12:00 -
[141] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:Hello everyone,
I would like some feedback.
Do you think black holes need change of effect? If yes then what new effects would you propose?
Thank you for your answers!
Change the Inertia penalty so that it is only applied when your Propulsion module is active. Change the Missile velocity penalty to a Missile Flight Time bonus instead. (Yes this will add some ranged fights, but wormholers needs to learn that there are other buttons than just the Orbit on a wormhole.) Shook Eelm's hand at Fanfest 2012 Shook CCP Dolan's hand at Fanfest 2013
Booted someone EVE-Famous from a pub at Fanfest 2013 |
Feer Truelight
152
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 16:38:00 -
[142] - Quote
Umm... Invert the current boni/mali?
You know... Event horizon and so. Everything gets slower near a black hole since the gravity is so strong. Even light at light speed can't escape! EVE Online Fraud Prevention - http://eve-fraud.blogspot.com |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
54
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 17:57:00 -
[143] - Quote
Feer Truelight wrote:Umm... Invert the current boni/mali?
You know... Event horizon and so. Everything gets slower near a black hole since the gravity is so strong. Even light at light speed can't escape!
Yes, but, and this is a big but, if you ignore how little we know about how physics actually changes in a strong gravitational field like that then Relativity states that we wouldn't actually notice any change in time or space, everything would be moving normally to us but an outside observer would see things slow down and almost stop the closer we got.
Of course, this thread isn't about Black Hole physics. Eve and Physics don't really belong together.
This is about the possibility of tweaking the effects of Black Hole wormhole systems for gameplay reasons. |
Maxisabe
Reduced Connections
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 19:58:00 -
[144] - Quote
Sorry if this has already been proposed, didn't have time to look through all the posts, but its worth looking into the effects of reducing mass of ships
Mass Multiplier 0.95, 0.90, 0.85, 0.80, 0.75, 0.70
- It should be a simple change in line with other wormhole effects (HIC's can already modify there own mass) - Adds another calculation when rolling holes - Allows 4 caps to move out of a C5/C6 (but not in, and with a very restricted subcap fleet) - Changes stats effected by the mass change
Downside
- possible unexpected side effects of lowered mass on non-HIC's? |
Robert Harrison
Aperture Harmonics K162
10
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 22:20:00 -
[145] - Quote
Maxisabe wrote:Sorry if this has already been proposed, didn't have time to look through all the posts, but its worth looking into the effects of reducing mass of ships
Mass Multiplier 0.95, 0.90, 0.85, 0.80, 0.75, 0.70
- It should be a simple change in line with other wormhole effects (HIC's can already modify there own mass) - Adds another calculation when rolling holes - Allows 4 caps to move out of a C5/C6 (but not in, and with a very restricted subcap fleet) - Changes stats effected by the mass change
Downside
- possible unexpected side effects of lowered mass on non-HIC's?
I'll be honest... This is an intriguing idea... But I think the Bad Idea's thread is this way
The issue with it is that it would allow for unequal force projection through a wormhole. You can bring 4 dreads into my system, but I and everybody else can only bring 3 into yours. This would only be good for people living in these god-forsaken systems and bad for everyone else.
The current mechanic, while maybe not perfect, is at least fair. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
55
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 22:44:00 -
[146] - Quote
Robert Harrison wrote:I'll be honest... This is an intriguing idea... But I think the Bad Idea's thread is this wayThe issue with it is that it would allow for unequal force projection through a wormhole. You can bring 4 dreads into my system, but I and everybody else can only bring 3 into yours. This would only be good for people living in these god-forsaken systems and bad for everyone else. The current mechanic, while maybe not perfect, is at least fair. Edit: Actually, on a +10% hole, if you were attempting to just seed capitals between a C6 BH and any other C6 (there is only one C6-C6 BH btw), you could seed as many as 5 capitals at a time. Also if you were committing to the fight this would allow for 3 dread, 1 carrier, and a considerable sub-capital fleet of t3's.
I don't really support the mass idea, just want to get that out of the way first.
However I don't think most people would shove that many capitals through because you can only bring N-1 back at a time, even though you can shove N through. Unless you're committing capitals to take a system over this is not particularly useful because the logistics of getting them back become painful. |
Caleb Seremshur
Angel of War Game 0f Tears
60
|
Posted - 2013.08.31 19:42:00 -
[147] - Quote
What about reducing missile explosion radius and decreasing explosion velocity? Reduce flight time by 20% increase kinetic damage by 20%. Thematically appropriate system effects. Missiles become shorter ranged by the shrapnel hits like a train. Read my thread here for my thoughts on eve economy https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=263968&find=unread --- Mining in game, from the perspective of an IRL miner. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3503687&#post3503687 ----á for FW rebalance in 2013 |
Krops Vont
Hard Knocks Inc. Kill It With Fire
8
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 19:58:00 -
[148] - Quote
Consider having a Mass addition to prop mods Make it so black hole effect contains: Affected statWormhole class 123456 Ship resistances -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50% <- Questionable but could be lowered and applied to all 3 Ship velocity +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100% <- key feature of black holes should stay Ship Propulsion mass+10% +19% +27% +34% +41% +50% Inertia -25% -44% -55% -68% -85% -100% Lock Range +10% +19% +27% +34% +41% +50% Harvester module Cycle duration -25% -44% -55% -68% -85% -100% (Salvagers, strip miners, ect)
Some other ideas: Bonus to ships propulsion module mass/timer increase/decrease including MJDs. Reduce cap usage on prop mods? Increase or decrease cycle time on specific/one type of module(s) or high/med/low slots Reduction to Sensor strength/locked targets |
The Spod
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
54
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 20:49:00 -
[149] - Quote
Make them traps.
Getting podkilled in BH makes you lose 100/200/300/400/500/600k sp by putting a negative training roadblock or removing skill level from your biggest sp skill until the dues are paid. |
Trinkets friend
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
1133
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 00:24:00 -
[150] - Quote
The Spod wrote:Make them traps.
Getting podkilled in BH makes you lose 100/200/300/400/500/600k sp by putting a negative training roadblock or removing skill level from your biggest sp skill until the dues are paid.
Whoa, buddy, we don't want to buff them THAT much! YOLO is the Carpe Diem of Gen Y http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
|
Keith Planck
League of Extraordinary Equines Disciples of Vectron
544
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 03:34:00 -
[151] - Quote
Black holes make your ship fly backwards.
Black holes always have a connection to Goonswarm's home system. |
Cheesy Feet
Anomalous Existence
36
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 09:29:00 -
[152] - Quote
Afuran wrote:I think they should be left alone. I also think that more systems should have 'difficult' effects and not all systems should be beneficial.
I'll never get over this 'this should be 'fixed' and 'that should be made easier for me' mentality that is prevalent in Eve.
This game is meant to present the harsh reality of space combat. There should be harsh environments to challenge people to adapt and thrive in areas where the noobs or the faint at heart don't dare to go.
Make the harsher environments more lucrative in line with Eve's isk vs risk model. Something like better PI, moon mining (what!?), more challenging sleepers (but more salvage/loot) - that kind of thing.
This makes the most sense and gets my vote.
|
Karak Bol
Crepuscular
103
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 13:20:00 -
[153] - Quote
Krops Vont wrote: Harvester module Cycle duration -25% -44% -55% -68% -85% -100% (Salvagers, strip miners, ect)
Woaa... Not sure if serious. Click button, get bacon in the extreme. |
|
ISD Suvetar
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
2388
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 22:10:00 -
[154] - Quote
Hi,
Please avoid trolling, thanks!
Thread cleaned slightly. ISD Suvetar Captain/Commando Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn
Department 10
46
|
Posted - 2013.09.08 10:15:00 -
[155] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Quote:A sufficiently compact mass will deform spacetime to form a black hole, a region of spacetime from which nothing, not even light, can escape. Around a black hole there is a surface called an event horizon that marks the point of no return. Black Hole Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 5 Class 6 Inertia Multiplier 1.25 1.44 1.55 1.68 1.85 2.00 Max Range Multiplier 0.90 0.81 0.73 0.66 0.59 0.50 Falloff Modifier 0.90 0.81 0.73 0.66 0.59 0.50 Missile Velocity Multiplier 0.90 0.81 0.73 0.66 0.59 0.50 Maximum velocity multiplier 1.25 1.44 1.55 1.68 1.85 2.00 Control range multiplier 0.90 0.81 0.73 0.66 0.59 0.50 So, from the look of things the original intent was to support MWD/AB PvP at basically knife range, except that's not exactly uncommon anyway and the speed change actually throws a lot of things out of whack as far as speed tanking goes. It's fun to like, zoom around in a cov-ops your first trip into one but I can't imagine living in one. I do like the theme though but the other sites have much more direct buffs to certain styles of play. Some more than others, certainly, but the black hole is more of a fun toy than somewhere you would want to live because of how it functions.
How about the following: I'm going for a theme around missile based bonuses. They tend to not get a lot of love in PvP or elsewhere and I think it would be cool to have a wormhole where the Phoenix really shines as a dread of choice. Missile velocity increase: Not too much, say 5% or even 2.5% per class level but enough to make the Tengu and other missile boats have some really scary damage projection. Right now I don't feel the current decrease adds much beyond a "no HAM Legion fleets here" sign and some annoyance. Besides it conflicts rather annoyingly with the velocity bonus to everything else. Explosion Radius: Decreased by up to 50%. Potential problems with dread-blap but possibly mitigated by the missile travel time, giving enemies in PvP the chance to react to the incoming missiles and overheat hardeners and mitigate damage. Tracking: Minus 5% per level. This basically says if you're bringing gun-boats into this hole you'd better not rely on tracking or bring tons of webs. Moros, go home you're drunk. Falloff: I'm somewhat partial to the falloff penalty but that might be too much of a hit to Arties which would, at this point, be the least affected turret system. The idea here is that space is a little distorted so your guns are pretty hit or miss. Warp Velocity: This is more of a "just for fun" thing that may end up having interesting consequences. Lets let warp zip you around up to 50% faster. Maybe this will let your bomber beat that Noctis back to the exit hole, maybe not. Velocity Bonus: After some mulling I think I'd leave this but at max 50% effectiveness. Yes, it hurts missile damage but in PvE you can web everything down anyway and the explosion radius boost helps mitigate it, especially with larger missiles. It supports a kiting setup which range boosted missiles would be absolutely scary in or short range brawls with heavy use of Webs.
Overall I think this would help give Black Holes a unique play style, similar to the other wormholes and allow owners of a Black Hole to make use of some less utilized ships in defense of their home (and for making tons of ISK).
Argh! This makes my head hurt. I have little knowledge on this side of New Eden. Is a black hole another name for wormholes or is it something different? |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
164
|
Posted - 2013.09.08 23:54:00 -
[156] - Quote
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote:Argh! This makes my head hurt. I have little knowledge on this side of New Eden. Is a black hole another name for wormholes or is it something different?
A Black Hole is one of a number of possible system-wide environmental effects that can be found in various Wormhole Systems. Just being present in the system affects your ship's stats. For more information I suggest the wiki page on wormhole effects. |
CeNSeR
Boris Johnson's Love Children
41
|
Posted - 2013.09.09 01:12:00 -
[157] - Quote
System effects change every dt or randomly so when you log in some research has to be done everytime you log in.
Use existing effects and add some new funky ones so you dont know what the hell is going on without spending some time to find out. |
Thor66777
Obstergo Bitten.
30
|
Posted - 2013.09.09 03:37:00 -
[158] - Quote
Have the black hole affect cpu and powergrid output of a ship. I bet you could get some crazy fits going. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
167
|
Posted - 2013.09.09 04:51:00 -
[159] - Quote
Thor66777 wrote:Have the black hole affect cpu and powergrid output of a ship. I bet you could get some crazy fits going.
Which would immediately break if you left the system...
Massive defender's advantage too, especially in lower class wormholes. |
Axloth Okiah
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
155
|
Posted - 2013.09.09 06:57:00 -
[160] - Quote
corbexx wrote:would there be anyway to give black holes more statics ^^ this W-Space Realtor |
|
Trinkets friend
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
1184
|
Posted - 2013.09.09 07:04:00 -
[161] - Quote
How about we make warp speed increase by 25 / 33 / 44 / 58 / 85 / 100 percent. This would assist with ganking everything really quickly, especially if you rigged up a ceptor (60 AU/s baby!), with a concomittant increase in capacitor cost to enter warp.
So you arrive with no capacitor to actually fight, but w/e. You can deal with it. *sunglasses* YOLO is the Carpe Diem of Gen Y http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
Angsty Teenager
Broski North Black Legion.
176
|
Posted - 2013.09.09 21:18:00 -
[162] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:How about we make warp speed increase by 25 / 33 / 44 / 58 / 85 / 100 percent. This would assist with ganking everything really quickly, especially if you rigged up a ceptor (60 AU/s baby!), with a concomittant increase in capacitor cost to enter warp.
So you arrive with no capacitor to actually fight, but w/e. You can deal with it. *sunglasses*
Too bad max warp speed has little to do with how fast you actually get somewhere outside of large systems. Maybe if CCP actually fixed the warp acceleration to actually be different between ship classes... |
Le'Mon Tichim
End-of-Line
42
|
Posted - 2013.09.09 21:44:00 -
[163] - Quote
CeNSeR wrote:System effects change every dt or randomly so when you log in some research has to be done everytime you log in.
Use existing effects and add some new funky ones so you dont know what the hell is going on without spending some time to find out.
So, every day you essentially change solar systems? You're aware that's what you're suggesting, right?
Go to sleep in a Pulsar, wake up in a Wolf-Rayet.
Yeah. Can you hear them? They are calling to us. It is beautiful. http://thegreattichim.wordpress.com/ |
CeNSeR
Boris Johnson's Love Children
41
|
Posted - 2013.09.09 22:20:00 -
[164] - Quote
Le'Mon Tichim wrote:CeNSeR wrote:System effects change every dt or randomly so when you log in some research has to be done everytime you log in.
Use existing effects and add some new funky ones so you dont know what the hell is going on without spending some time to find out. So, every day you essentially change solar systems? You're aware that's what you're suggesting, right? Go to sleep in a Pulsar, wake up in a Wolf-Rayet. Yeah.
Yep I am fully aware of what I suggested or I would have been unable to suggest it in the first place. |
Trinkets friend
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
1188
|
Posted - 2013.09.09 23:51:00 -
[165] - Quote
Angsty Teenager wrote:Trinkets friend wrote:How about we make warp speed increase by 25 / 33 / 44 / 58 / 85 / 100 percent. This would assist with ganking everything really quickly, especially if you rigged up a ceptor (60 AU/s baby!), with a concomittant increase in capacitor cost to enter warp.
So you arrive with no capacitor to actually fight, but w/e. You can deal with it. *sunglasses* Too bad max warp speed has little to do with how fast you actually get somewhere outside of large systems. Maybe if CCP actually fixed the warp acceleration to actually be different between ship classes...
Everything I suggest is utterly serious. Everything. All the time. We here at Trinkets Friendly Design labs pride ourselves on the workmanship of our theorycraft, and consider all variables before making facetious suggestions. YOLO is the Carpe Diem of Gen Y http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
Kojaxe LeAppljaxe
Pilipino Corp Circle-Of-Two
1
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 06:31:00 -
[166] - Quote
What is a black hole.
1. Shouldn't have any planets, moons or sun. 2. Make it a home for el33t sleepers drones. hard to kill but drops tons of good loots. 3. like other have mentioned, no D-Scan. 4. Since there are no moons, no POS. 5. Lower the speed, like something sucking at you, make a black hole a black hole. 6. hard to detect the entrance and exit, must have astrometrics and other support skills to 5. 7. Good loots and more good loots sleepers/data/relic so explorers can't live there but to get good loots pve/pvp. Do you have like officer sleeper drones mods? make it happen.
:) |
Josilin du Guesclin
University of Caille Gallente Federation
113
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 11:02:00 -
[167] - Quote
Posting late to the party, but:
Cade Windstalker wrote:Quote:A sufficiently compact mass will deform spacetime to form a black hole, a region of spacetime from which nothing, not even light, can escape. Around a black hole there is a surface called an event horizon that marks the point of no return. Black Hole Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 5 Class 6 Inertia Multiplier 1.25 1.44 1.55 1.68 1.85 2.00 Max Range Multiplier 0.90 0.81 0.73 0.66 0.59 0.50 Falloff Modifier 0.90 0.81 0.73 0.66 0.59 0.50 Missile Velocity Multiplier 0.90 0.81 0.73 0.66 0.59 0.50 Maximum velocity multiplier 1.25 1.44 1.55 1.68 1.85 2.00 Control range multiplier 0.90 0.81 0.73 0.66 0.59 0.50 So, from the look of things the original intent was to support MWD/AB PvP at basically knife range, except that's not exactly uncommon anyway and the speed change actually throws a lot of things out of whack as far as speed tanking goes. It's fun to like, zoom around in a cov-ops your first trip into one but I can't imagine living in one. I do like the theme though but the other sites have much more direct buffs to certain styles of play. Some more than others, certainly, but the black hole is more of a fun toy than somewhere you would want to live because of how it functions.
How about the following: I'm going for a theme around missile based bonuses. They tend to not get a lot of love in PvP or elsewhere and I think it would be cool to have a wormhole where the Phoenix really shines as a dread of choice. Missile velocity increase Explosion Radius Tracking Penalty Falloff Penalty Warp Velocity: This is more of a "just for fun" thing that may end up having interesting consequences. Lets let warp zip you around up to 50% faster. Maybe this will let your bomber beat that Noctis back to the exit hole, maybe not. Velocity Bonus: After some mulling I think I'd leave this but at max 50% effectiveness. Yes, it hurts missile damage but in PvE you can web everything down anyway and the explosion radius boost helps mitigate it, especially with larger missiles. It supports a kiting setup which range boosted missiles would be absolutely scary in or short range brawls with heavy use of Webs. Overall I think this would help give Black Holes a unique play style, similar to the other wormholes and allow owners of a Black Hole to make use of some less utilized ships in defense of their home (and for making tons of ISK). [trimmed for space reasons]
It seems to me that the theme of the current Black Hole is 'increased velocity and inertia', and that the inconsistent part is that missiles get hammered rather than buffed. Consistent with that theme is more range for missiles, and more explosion velocity, rather than reduced explosion radius. This also off-sets the ship velocity bonus, and removes the 'my Phoenix was speed tanked by a titan' problem with capital missiles.
|
Josilin du Guesclin
University of Caille Gallente Federation
113
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 11:08:00 -
[168] - Quote
Kojaxe LeAppljaxe wrote:What is a black hole.
1. Shouldn't have any planets, moons or sun. Its a black hole why would it have a steady system?
This argument applies to Pulsars, Red Giants (they'd have eaten their planets), and most other types as well. However, if you look at the skybox in a system you'll note that the Black Hole/whatever is not actually in the solar system, just nearby. Thus any system can have planets, etc.
|
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
865
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 12:46:00 -
[169] - Quote
You used to be able to add the secondary suns to the overview and warp to them. I used to have a screenshot of my ship chilling at zero km of a Black Hole. They'd typically be some tens of AU from the main star. |
Malception
Cold Moon Destruction.
127
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 12:48:00 -
[170] - Quote
I've been quasi-following this thread and from what I can tell there seems to be a focus on creating system effects that would mimic what an actual blackhole might do to a ship, but this shouldn't be the case. For instance, a magnetar, for instance, would just rip our ships and clones to pieces. Then it would strip those pieces into smaller pieces. But that's not what the system effect is.
I do have a question about the things that can be suggested though. Are we limited to only the variables that are currently being modified within w-space or can we pick other ship stats? For example, could we suggest sensor strength or mass? |
|
Keith Planck
Sky Fighters
547
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 18:48:00 -
[171] - Quote
Malception wrote:I've been quasi-following this thread and from what I can tell there seems to be a focus on creating system effects that would mimic what an actual blackhole might do to a ship, but this shouldn't be the case. For instance, a magnetar, for instance, would just rip our ships and clones to pieces. Then it would strip those pieces into smaller pieces. But that's not what the system effect is.
I do have a question about the things that can be suggested though. Are we limited to only the variables that are currently being modified within w-space or can we pick other ship stats? For example, could we suggest sensor strength or mass?
Were limited to simple stat changes that wouldn't be a programming nightmare.
Local rep + damage projection bonuses would be sick with the new marauders 8) |
Blodhgarm Dethahal
Transcendent Sedition Dustm3n
31
|
Posted - 2013.09.19 01:15:00 -
[172] - Quote
Give them Hull Tanking Bonuses... 5/10/15/20/25/30 % bonus to resist or hull HP ammount -Bl+¦d |
Janeway84
Masters Of Destiny Pride Before Fall
30
|
Posted - 2013.09.19 10:22:00 -
[173] - Quote
James Solo wrote:Combining suggestions I like most in this thread with a few of my own: Wipe current bonuses.
- Add a Dual static
This alone will make it extremely valuable for pvp corps. Because of this value, pve should be harder, not easier in higher class wormholes.
- Local rep bonus (shield and armor)
Allows lower class black holes to be viable for smaller pvp corps and PVE becomes easier for them as well. Barrier to entry is low because tanking alone becomes easier.
- Proportional remote rep nerf
Makes it a lot harder to run the higher class sites, still viable however(people always find a way)
- 100% bonus to large hybrid, laser, and projectile turret damage, 100% to torpedo and cruise missile damage in a c6, scaled down accordingly for lower classes.
This way there is more room for playing with mass, teir3 battlecruisers can use the large guns in a c1 without having to build the battleship there. This will have interesting effects on stealth bomber damage as well.
- 75% less effectiveness of webs and target painters in a c6.
This has the dual purpose of making dread blapping hard, but making sites still doable. You just have to use more webs or figure out other ways of killing sleepers. Also scaled down for lower classes.
- Proportional bonus to range of webs, scram/point, and target painters
If a dual static cannot be done in a c5/c6 with the current programming, would it be possible to allow the ihub upgrade "Quantum Flux Generator" effects to the system by default? Essentially making them just very busy wormholes.
+1 would make them black holes more intresting, althought im not sure i like nerfing webs and target painter so hard... Since alot of players depend on them for a few different purposes. Would be cool if black hole wormholes had 3 statics perhaps to make them unique aswell?
|
Anselm Cenobite
Gold Ring Enterprises Unknown Destination
6
|
Posted - 2013.09.25 19:09:00 -
[174] - Quote
Make Black Hole systems into Marauder Heavens. Have them slow all movement 20%, but cut the down-time for Microjump Drives in half, so teleporting Battleships become the norm--just because no other WH system has a similar effect. Then give each Black Hole system an extra static that randomly cycles from day to day between Class 1 to Class 6 WHs. Just a thought.
In general, if you are going to add new abilities/modules for ships that didn't exist before Wormholes were first introduced, and you want to shake up Black Hole systems generally, it makes a lot of sense to tweak Black Holes so they modify those new abilities/modules introduced after 2010--just because none of the earlier WHs before 2010 did that. |
Trinkets friend
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
1198
|
Posted - 2013.09.25 23:54:00 -
[175] - Quote
Janeway84 wrote:
+1 would make them black holes more intresting, althought im not sure i like nerfing webs and target painter so hard... Since alot of players depend on them for a few different purposes. Would be cool if black hole wormholes had 3 statics perhaps to make them unique aswell?
ie; "don't make it harder to dread blap in C5 black holes, please, pretty please. in fact, put my vote in with the "turn black holes into bread farming heaven"crowd"
You people.... YOLO is the Carpe Diem of Gen Y http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
|
ISD Tyrozan
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
159
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 06:47:00 -
[176] - Quote
A trolling post has been removed.
Forum rule 5. Trolling is prohibited. ISD Tyrozan Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department @ISDTyrozan | @ISD_CCL |
|
Alundil
The Unnamed. The NME Alliance
325
|
Posted - 2013.10.07 22:02:00 -
[177] - Quote
Chitsa,
Any updates on the progress here? Clone mechanics enchancements Deep Space Probe Revival |
Joey Judas
Repo Distribution and Salvage
2
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 10:49:00 -
[178] - Quote
Leave Black Holes as they are. Smaller corps need some breathing space to grow in blob heaven... |
Alundil
The Unnamed. The NME Alliance
345
|
Posted - 2013.12.24 23:08:00 -
[179] - Quote
Joey Judas wrote:Leave Black Holes as they are. Smaller corps need some breathing space to grow in blob heaven... I'm not certain the word means what you think it means.
"Blob" in w-space is not a common occurrence. Especially with the typical Eve-O connotations that "blob" carries with it.
That said, I don't dislike blackhole effects but would like to see more varied effects and I think that blackhole systems are good candidates as the effect is relatively meh in comparison to other effects. Clone mechanics enchancements Deep Space Probe Revival |
Lucius Arcturus
Peoples Capitalist Liberation Front Virtue of Selfishness
208
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 00:44:00 -
[180] - Quote
I like the suggestion of more connecting WHs. An extra static is a possibility, but more traveling/random WHs could be more fun. A bit of unpredictability. Taggart Website Taggart Blog Taggart WH Sales |
|
Kalel Nimrott
Sky Fighters
718
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 03:55:00 -
[181] - Quote
Now you can apply the warp speed changes to black holes. |
Rob Cobb
Probe Patrol Polarized.
4
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 06:08:00 -
[182] - Quote
I would like to see a hole that counters the cataclysmic variable.
e.g.
Effect c1 c2 c3 c4 c5 c6 remote rep amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50% remote rep range -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50% shield/armor/hull hp +10% +19% +27% +34% +41% +50% local rep amount bonus +10% +19% +27% +34% +41% +50%
no bonus or penalty for cap transfer
I can see pve being doable still in upper class either using local reps on lokis and cap boosters or using archons which should have enough rep power even with the penalties in upper class to keep a loki up, and i see these wormholes being more sought after in lower class as less tank is needed for pve, therefore more damage mods, as with magnetars, pulsars, and wolf rayets.
i would be excited to see the multiple new pvp fleet doctrines developed for these, to go pure buffer and brawl, go local reps only and hope to survive alphas, a balance of both, whether to keep up huge fleet cap chains to power those local reps, etc.
Not to mention, with buffer and local reps bonuses, i will troll my fleet and take shield to an armour fleet, and vice versa. |
LaserzPewPew
Obstergo Red Coat Conspiracy
18
|
Posted - 2013.12.27 02:54:00 -
[183] - Quote
Black holes should up to double the speed of the game. Time speed increase and all.
Imagine pvp encounters at double the speed and fcs having to respond to situations twice as fast.
Imagine being able to clear sites in a c6 twice as fast, but you must be on the ball for reps and decision making.
After all, black holes warp spacetime. Would be hillarious. |
Svodola Darkfury
Heaven's End League of Infamy
324
|
Posted - 2013.12.27 07:58:00 -
[184] - Quote
LaserzPewPew wrote:Black holes should up to double the speed of the game. Time speed increase and all. Imagine pvp encounters at double the speed and fcs having to respond to situations twice as fast. Imagine being able to clear sites in a c6 twice as fast, but you must be on the ball for reps and decision making. After all, black holes warp spacetime. Would be hillarious.
This could be fun. The sort of reverse tidi thing we saw in AT11?
Say hello to my Interceptor gang.... WOOSH >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Svo. CEO of Heaven's End; Bad League of Legends Player. |
Mizhir
Euphoria Released Triumvirate.
48881
|
Posted - 2013.12.27 10:10:00 -
[185] - Quote
Svodola Darkfury wrote:LaserzPewPew wrote:Black holes should up to double the speed of the game. Time speed increase and all. Imagine pvp encounters at double the speed and fcs having to respond to situations twice as fast. Imagine being able to clear sites in a c6 twice as fast, but you must be on the ball for reps and decision making. After all, black holes warp spacetime. Would be hillarious. This could be fun. The sort of reverse tidi thing we saw in AT11? Say hello to my Interceptor gang.... WOOSH >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Svo.
Trust me. It is not as fun as it sounds. Atleast not when you are flying logi and the tidi is 700% One Man Crew - The official Bringing Solo Back contest
SCL5 Winner |
Kaban Bastanold
The Motley Few
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.27 11:44:00 -
[186] - Quote
My thoughtsGǪ. IGÇÖm thinking of black holes and how they affect things with mass, my thoughts being to make it very GǪ race orientated.
Missile velocity GÇô fine, this makes sense Ship velocity GÇô Bonus? Where missiles get a decrease? Surely a ship and a missile arenGÇÖt that far removed? Both are metal objects with mass right? Bin this, we could say ships complex computers can adjust for the black hole effects thanks to the large more complex engine. Lose this. Inertia GÇô Fine, keep it.
This is where I propose the changes, where things with mass are effected harshly, things without mass get a bonus i.e. electronics. Lock range GÇô Reverse, give it a minor bonus. Drone control range GÇô bonus Fall off GÇô Lose this, just because of the following Turret traversal speed: -10 -19 GÇô 27 -34 -41 -50 Projectile turret damage: -10 -19 GÇô 27 -34 -41 -50 Hybrid turret damage: -3 -6 -9 -12 -15 -18 Energy turret damage: +3 +6 +9 +12 +15 +18 ECM Bonus +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6% Why? Wormhole effects the stability of mass based projectiles resulting in lost damage and boosts Electrical effects. Hybrids being a hybrid but still mass based, loses damage, projectiles get borked as have missilesGǪ. I love projectiles. I realize this would make energy weapons pretty much the only effective weapons other than dronesGǪ and at dread class the only effective weapon. So. Missile EM damage: +3 +6 +9 +12 +15 +18 Amarr drone damage: +3 +6 +9 +12 +15 +18
Obviously this is going to make black holesGǪ.. complicated affairs. But we like complicatedGǪ complicated is what makes eve what it is. Hell, if you really want, throw in an energy vamp effect too. I realize this is also going to mean Black holes have more effects than anything else. My thought behind electrical bonuses is that although Black holes are believed to also emit energy, not just suck in everything. The whole thing would look like:
Lock range GÇô Reverse, give it a minor bonus. Drone control range GÇô bonus Turret traversal speed: -10 -19 GÇô 27 -34 -41 -50 Projectile turret damage: -10 -19 GÇô 27 -34 -41 -50 Hybrid turret damage: -3 -6 -9 -12 -15 -18 Energy turret damage: +3 +6 +9 +12 +15 +18 ECM + ECCM Bonus +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6% Missile EM damage: +3 +6 +9 +12 +15 +18 Amarr drone damage: +3 +6 +9 +12 +15 +18
I would say reduce tracking butGǪ. There was an issue with that effect in the past. As Per Tidi.. It wouldnGÇÖt speed up, it would slow down.
Thanks for your time.
|
Captain Ravanor Eistiras
1st Legion The Dark Angels Relentless Heroes Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2013.12.28 11:12:00 -
[187] - Quote
why not just add a gravitational pull? get to close and it sucks you in, -x2 to speed when tryting to leave or escape its effects?
|
LaserzPewPew
Obstergo Red Coat Conspiracy
21
|
Posted - 2013.12.28 20:29:00 -
[188] - Quote
Svodola Darkfury wrote:LaserzPewPew wrote:Black holes should up to double the speed of the game. Time speed increase and all. Imagine pvp encounters at double the speed and fcs having to respond to situations twice as fast. Imagine being able to clear sites in a c6 twice as fast, but you must be on the ball for reps and decision making. After all, black holes warp spacetime. Would be hillarious. This could be fun. The sort of reverse tidi thing we saw in AT11? Say hello to my Interceptor gang.... WOOSH >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Svo.
That is exactly whay I am proposing. However, scaling up to either 150% or 200% tidi.
The devs are looking for something unique, interesting, and simple to implement. The functionality is already there with tidi, the wormhole servers very rarely see any straining fights, and this would add that unique flavor they are looking for.
Clean and fun. |
Winthorp
Sky Fighters
531
|
Posted - 2013.12.28 21:20:00 -
[189] - Quote
LaserzPewPew wrote:[quote=Svodola Darkfury] The devs are looking for something unique, interesting, and simple to implement.
I sense they have given up on all they were looking at for WH's.... cough... POS's.... cough
|
Angsty Teenager
Broski North Black Legion.
232
|
Posted - 2013.12.29 02:24:00 -
[190] - Quote
LaserzPewPew wrote:Svodola Darkfury wrote:LaserzPewPew wrote:Black holes should up to double the speed of the game. Time speed increase and all. Imagine pvp encounters at double the speed and fcs having to respond to situations twice as fast. Imagine being able to clear sites in a c6 twice as fast, but you must be on the ball for reps and decision making. After all, black holes warp spacetime. Would be hillarious. This could be fun. The sort of reverse tidi thing we saw in AT11? Say hello to my Interceptor gang.... WOOSH >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Svo. That is exactly whay I am proposing. However, scaling up to either 150% or 200% tidi. The devs are looking for something unique, interesting, and simple to implement. The functionality is already there with tidi, the wormhole servers very rarely see any straining fights, and this would add that unique flavor they are looking for. Clean and fun.
I really doubt it would be clean or fun. The server already bugs outs when you try to do stuff really quick because of the the fact that the server works on 1 second ticks. Pretty sure doing 200% tidi will just screw it up even more.
Not saying I don't like the idea, but I think from a technical standpoint it doesn't really make sense. |
|
Kalel Nimrott
Sky Fighters
746
|
Posted - 2013.12.29 03:23:00 -
[191] - Quote
Faster warp speeds! Mega baiting systems! |
Kateryna I
Lords Of The Universe Exiled Ones
0
|
Posted - 2013.12.29 03:32:00 -
[192] - Quote
LaserzPewPew wrote:Svodola Darkfury wrote:LaserzPewPew wrote:Black holes should up to double the speed of the game. Time speed increase and all. Imagine pvp encounters at double the speed and fcs having to respond to situations twice as fast. Imagine being able to clear sites in a c6 twice as fast, but you must be on the ball for reps and decision making. After all, black holes warp spacetime. Would be hillarious. This could be fun. The sort of reverse tidi thing we saw in AT11? Say hello to my Interceptor gang.... WOOSH >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Svo. That is exactly whay I am proposing. However, scaling up to either 150% or 200% tidi. The devs are looking for something unique, interesting, and simple to implement. The functionality is already there with tidi, the wormhole servers very rarely see any straining fights, and this would add that unique flavor they are looking for. Clean and fun.
Yes Imagine that, mining x2, most profitable WH for any mining corp... that might spark some new confilicts!!! YES, YES, YES
And conflicts at x2 :]
This could extend to PI being twice as quick.. hmmm interesting ...
Industrials paradise anyone? |
Kalel Nimrott
Sky Fighters
746
|
Posted - 2013.12.29 04:24:00 -
[193] - Quote
No to the above.
Edit: A little more tought to the warp speed increase. More warp speed due to the black hole effect "warping" the space around you, and slower subwarp speed, couse the engines have to break the gravitational pull. |
Billy Hardcore
Daktaklakpak. Red Coat Conspiracy
21
|
Posted - 2014.01.02 16:17:00 -
[194] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Adding a blue tag to this thread.
Help the CSM help CCP help you.
cute....
Going to war over religion is like killing someone because your imaginary friend is better that theirs. - BOB |
Phyrr
The Gosimer and Scarab
2
|
Posted - 2014.01.03 18:02:00 -
[195] - Quote
Make it more black holey.
Keep all effects the same, but add warp disruption/scram/web range and effectiveness bonuses. Increase the number of wormholes that can spawn in the system by x3.
|
OcelotFIST2
Tri-Cell Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 02:01:00 -
[196] - Quote
Well, why not use a partly mixture from all...
Leave the speed-buff be, lower the inertia debuff just a bit. At the same time increase missile velocity aswell as optimal and falloff, while decreasing tracking and explosion velocity.
While it would straighten out the old bh-concept by repping the logical lack, it wouldn't necessarily make pve that much harder or easier. You would maybe also get some interesting pvp-possibilities like specified kiting fleets... maybe only those, but also maybe some specified mixed setups like blaster-brawlers with shield kiters and the like... If any of those get too strong, you may also get the inertia debuff back to where it was...
Anyways it wouldn't make any sort of fighting nigh impossible in my view, it would just make it an ammo-eating fest.
|
Thatt Guy
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
55
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 09:23:00 -
[197] - Quote
+1000 to a change +1 to a missile wh (as we have everything else) |
Bane Nucleus
Sky Fighters
676
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 21:23:00 -
[198] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Adding a blue tag to this thread.
Help the CSM help CCP help you.
If our CSM wasn't trying to get us involved with null sec, I would be more for it No trolling please |
Justin Cody
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
68
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 22:36:00 -
[199] - Quote
Well to make it easy on CCP I'd say start with inverting the penalties to weapons
- -41% missile velocity should be +41% missile velocity
- -41% drone control range should be +41% drone control range
- keep the -41% to falloff we already have a turret bonus WH in the magnetar
If you do that and leave everything else alone...that would play heavily into the current ishtar/domi meta. Perhaps too much in the case of drones which are already OP as heck. But giving it a shot shouldn't be too hard as a simple bonus change.
drastic changes are hard to pull back on. Put some simple stuff like this into testing, then focus on maybe a damage application bonus for missiles like the explosion velocity or radius if the flight speed increase alone doesn't seem enough to compete with drones perfect alpha at unbelievable range.
/small controlled changes //want WH nebulae! |
Capitol One
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
142
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 22:41:00 -
[200] - Quote
Every ship besides Marauders gets sucked into the black hole and destroyed (podded too!). Also 500% increase to blue loot drops.
mmmm |
|
Lajos Perseus
Conquering Darkness
33
|
Posted - 2014.01.05 01:52:00 -
[201] - Quote
Glasgow Dunlop wrote:Warde Guildencrantz wrote:make it have 2x time dilation
IE everything happens at twice the speed
seriously that would be a cool wormhole to live in... that and make black hole effects random for dt to dt
I like that! |
Seraph IX Basarab
Hades Effect Surely You're Joking
203
|
Posted - 2014.01.05 19:48:00 -
[202] - Quote
Going on the theme that blackholes pull you in and are hard to get out of, we could make them havens for smaller ships. So frigs would have a 0 modified to their mass/velocity etc but everything higher would have an exponentially worse effect. Cruisers and above should take extremely long to warp away, align etc. Their tracking should be awful and just really focus on giving frigs the advantage.
If CCP could implement a way that you'd have a certain velocity in order to get out of wormholes, it would be interesting too. That way if you jump in with anything too big, you're stuck.
Too harsh? Good. |
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
633
|
Posted - 2014.01.05 22:29:00 -
[203] - Quote
Heres a thought, let black holes have 2 hisec statics that self activate. Additional Normal wandering hole spawn mechanics apply.
But each will only allow transit and not allow return until a significant time has expired 4 hrs for example, so in practice a sort of one way street. Simply give a 4 hr single pass polarisation timer. However the destination for both holes is available in the info on each hole before jumping (or how could you ever find your way home?)
Losec and null static black holes could also exist. Even more fun would be an additional Blackhole to Black hole Static.M
Life Timer 24 hrs, drop travellers 20k from hole. Wh bonuses and restrictions to benefit defence/evasion.
The risks involved in travelling back via a different route and being immediately polarised would justify limiting the use of interdiction bubbles and camping the hole itself.
Also encourage explorers looking for a short cut between HS locations without simply having loads of HS>HS directs.
Bring people into wh space without always all the "interesting" options that apply. But the wandering holes still allow for those conflict drivers.
The idea of encouraging people to dip into wormholes has value, a means to make the finding of them appealing to hs pilots without simply providing HSa>HSb would help achieve this.
A black with white inner circle WH coloration could be used to quickly identify them without entering.
Oh yes, this would mean that the reckless explorer without probes has a 4 hour wait in welcoming happy space before he can go out the way he came in. Should be amusing.
Edit in addition Ns>BH>Ns could produce a VERY interesting game mechanic. That might prove how shall we say, disruptive though There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Christopher Multsanti
Euphoria Released Triumvirate.
6
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 07:51:00 -
[204] - Quote
How about being able to set a Black hole System effects yourself.
When you enter a black hole system or log on in your home black hole system. You can warp to one of multiple beacons to set the system effects. Onlineing this beacon would take 15 mins.
You can choose to set your black hole to any of the current system effects currently in game. i.e a black hole can be any type of worm hole in game, with one effect only for black holes. That could be some sort of industry buff that people were asking for.
|
Borsek
A.A.A Ragnarok.
137
|
Posted - 2014.01.06 13:09:00 -
[205] - Quote
Remove black holes and change the systems into magnetars, problem solved. |
Nelly Uanos
Quebec's Underdog League Quebec United Legions
3
|
Posted - 2014.01.07 02:50:00 -
[206] - Quote
How about TiDi on 200% but no planet thus no moon.
If you feel this isn't enough fun, add the 2 statics idea.
|
okst666
Uncharted Skies Cerberus Unleashed
246
|
Posted - 2014.01.07 13:27:00 -
[207] - Quote
Nelly Uanos wrote:How about TiDi on 200% but no planet thus no moon. If you feel this isn't enough fun, add the 2 statics idea.
no Moon => no POS => no residents => noone to blob [X] < Nail here for new monitor |
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
34
|
Posted - 2014.01.07 14:42:00 -
[208] - Quote
The only thing that's been worthwhile so far is making it a missile WH (bonus).
All the folk asking for auto-opening statics, no moons, etc. I thought the point was that the bonuses in a black hole system sucked, and you wanted to make them more desirable.
The majority of the ideas just make the black hole a bigger pain (and let us not pretend that the two auto-opening K-space idea isn't so that you can quickly move goods out of your C5->C5 static - all nobility aside).
Besides, why do all the wormholes have to be desirable? It's not like all wormholes are occupied except for black holes and they need a buff so people want to move in. |
Marsan
Caldari Provisions
197
|
Posted - 2014.01.07 17:08:00 -
[209] - Quote
Honestly the easiest way of making them interesting would be to give them the equivalents of Quantum Flux Generator, Ore Prospecting Array, and Survey Network. This would make them a miner's paradise with good T3 salvage, and the downside that the increased number of random wormholes increases the danger. In terms of the effects I personally think it's just fine as it makes the systems undesirable to most large corps which means there is a greater chance of carebear targets in these system due to the lowered incentive to kick them out. Former forum cheerleader CCP, now just a hopeful small portion of the community. |
Lysus
Insanely Twisted D3vil's Childr3n
52
|
Posted - 2014.01.08 00:50:00 -
[210] - Quote
I honestly love Black Holes. The nerf on range makes it for epic in your face combat. Kiting and fighting at range is not an option in a Blackhole. The blackhole itself gives an advantage to close range brawlers. Just like any other hole gives advantages to other types of ships while taking away from another type. Pulsar for example gives amazing shield bonuses but screws armor.
LEAVE BLACK HOLES ALONE!!!!!! |
|
Komodo Askold
No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad
116
|
Posted - 2014.01.08 13:10:00 -
[211] - Quote
I'm liking the idea of black holes giving bonuses to missiles. After all, if they make ships faster, why not missiles? (yup, engineer here). With that in mind, what exact bonuses could them be?
- Missile velocity: seems like a pretty obvious choice. Would increase maximun effective range and increase the chance of them catching a very fast ship (if black holes keep their ship velocity bonuses, it would end up fairly balanced).
- Missile explosion velocity: would be interesting against speed tanks. That said, if ships keep their velocity bonus, the situation might end up as the same one in K-space... If designers want missiles to be powerful at black holes, they could reduce the ship speed bonus in order to make the explosion velocity bonus to win, but I'm not sure how much balanced that would be.
I also liked the idea someone posted about them giving bonuses to industry-related activities. It would be a quite refreshing change, and would probably make black hole systems to be highly desirable for T3 production, for example. Very interesting indeed. |
Lau DeMorte
EVE University Ivy League
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 18:01:00 -
[212] - Quote
I would change the effects to something along these lines.
-If shooting towards the center of the blackhole space -Increase range and damage of weapons. Increase velocity of ships and missiles. No effect to targetting range.
-if shooting away from the center impose a reverse of everything -Decrease range and damage of weapons. Decrease velocity of ships and missiles. No effect to targetting range.
-Apply to varying degrees according to angle and closeness from center of blackhole space.
-Center is instant death to travel through.
That is all that should happen. |
IMANALTFORTOMZ0R
you're doing it wrong
1
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 20:52:00 -
[213] - Quote
Komodo Askold wrote:After all, if they make ships faster, why not missiles? (yup, engineer here)
Komodo Askold wrote:(yup, engineer here)
I WAS WONDERING IF YOU WERE AN ENGINEER OR NOT. IT SOUNDED LIKE YOU MIGHT BE BUT YOU JUST CONFIRMED IT! TOP KEK |
Red Teufel
Mafia Redux Phobia.
334
|
Posted - 2014.01.10 15:03:00 -
[214] - Quote
a black-hole sounds scary like it should suck you in and devour you. you can never return. your sp is gone! |
Kaban Bastanold
The Motley Few
1
|
Posted - 2014.01.10 16:21:00 -
[215] - Quote
Red Teufel wrote:a black-hole sounds scary like it should suck you in and devour you. you can never return. your sp is gone!
Thanks for the insightful input there.
I think we need to try and stick to the actual Wormhole effects that are already out there for a guideline. I realize I posted rather a lengthy post already, i think i need to try and simplify. So of the wormholes out there, there are between 4 and 6 effects per system. Lets try and stick to that.
I'm going to try and be inventive but to also try and stick to the KISS Rules (keep it simple) TIDI and other effects are a bit much.
Ship Mass + Ship Velocity + Turret and module cap usage GÇô Capacitor capacity GÇô Mid slot module range and efficiency +
It would certainly make wormholes challenging for anyone unprepared.. I was debating one more but stuck on a few. Missile explosion velocity + Cap recharge rate + Hull hp + (lol) IdeaGÇÖs?
|
|
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
2780
|
Posted - 2014.01.10 23:16:00 -
[216] - Quote
Removed an off topic post. ISD Dorrim Barstorlode Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Baali Tekitsu
Herrscher der Zeit Test Alliance Please Ignore
610
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 13:08:00 -
[217] - Quote
Signature radius - Ship agility - (means more agile)
I think this would be enough but you could add some tanking bonus like Hull resist or repair amount or something like that. It would certainly help black holes out of their unsufferable state they are in atm. RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE |
Bane Nucleus
Sky Fighters
715
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 13:31:00 -
[218] - Quote
Black hole sun, won't you come? No trolling please |
Baali Tekitsu
Herrscher der Zeit Test Alliance Please Ignore
611
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 15:35:00 -
[219] - Quote
Bane Nucleus wrote:Black hole sun, won't you come?
Remove suns from black hole systems! RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE |
Bane Nucleus
Sky Fighters
716
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 15:38:00 -
[220] - Quote
You son of a.... No trolling please |
|
Wingzero Mileghere
Cascading Failure Un.Bound
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.12 04:13:00 -
[221] - Quote
current effects
Affected statWormhole class123456 Missile velocity -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50% Ship velocity +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100% Drone control range -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50% Inertia +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100% Lock Range -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50% Falloff -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50%
My proposal class 1 2 3 4 5 6 Missile velocity +10%+19%+27%+34% +41%+50% ship velocity -10% -20% -33% -44% -55% -65% tracking modifier -5% -12% -25% -36% -48% -60% this should affect sentry drones as well missile explosion velocity +10%+19%+27%+34% +41%+50% shield resistances -5% - 11% -22% -33% -44% -55% drone MWD speed -10% -20% -33% -44% -55% -65%
Going with the gravity being so harsh and the fact that no other wormhole has missile bonuses I think this would be a good fit. The gravity should weaken the shields hence the shield nerf, guns and sentries would also be affected as it would change the trajectory of the rounds being fired. I do not like the agility nerf through the inertia so that's just a preference. going with the idea that a black hole is constantly dragging things in go ahead and add the content for the indy guys and let this be the only class that has ice sites and a higher spawn rate for ore and gas sites. The idea for 2 statics is ok, but I don't think its needed just changing the spawns and the effects would be more than enough to make them more valuable it won't work for everyone but its not supposed to. If all wormholes are like magnitars then it would get boring very fast. wormhole space is supposed to be random and crazy that's what makes the content out here better for me at least but it doesn't appeal to all of eve and that's not a bad thing. I love having something different every time I see a new sig appear this is the only place in eve where you have the entirety of the map right out your door because you don't know who is in the next hole or what statics the next hole in the chain will have. So make it more to appeal to a niche so the space will be populated as of the moment the space is unlivable and I know that CCP didn't intend for people to live in w-space but it happened so make it better for the ones who chose to live out here. the modifiers I propose here would make it hard enough there is not many armor tanked missile boats, but something like this would make it more usable. plus the shield nerf would make the POS shields weaker as well so it would make for a good PVP buff.
Just my thoughts I probably babbled a bit, but I tend to do that at times. |
Erufen Rito
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
57
|
Posted - 2014.01.12 05:15:00 -
[222] - Quote
Something like this maybe?
http://i.imgur.com/tfcKsVz.png |
Kharaxus
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
39
|
Posted - 2014.01.13 04:17:00 -
[223] - Quote
In my opinion the question if there should be changes to effect and what they would be is confusing. There needs to be more information made available rather than plugging in more mathematics/algorithms.
The sleepers have a story - as simple as that may be, that's what makes them enjoyable to fight. In light of this I think any changes made to Wormholes in general, should simply be adding to the story of Wormholes - or the science fiction. For example: XXX is a new material discovered to counter the effects of YYYY effects (notice 3 X's and 4 Y's?) - therefore have so and so bring their mining ship to harvest the material.
Meanwhile, big bad so and so is closing in for the kill - which brings the "story" to an abrupt ending, until I can kill him or run away, and get back to the story........ |
Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland Test Alliance Please Ignore
470
|
Posted - 2014.01.13 17:06:00 -
[224] - Quote
cba to read all 11 pages. But since I have an alt living in a c2 w/ static hisec and c4, I would like to throw my opinion in here. Literally every black hole wh that I have seen is completely uninhabited regardless of class. This doesn't mean they are all uninhabited. But clearly they need attention. I'm glad to see some thought being put into the situation.
Our static C4 with Black Hole effect 2 days ago has 3 dozen cosmic signatures, 4 dozen combat sites, and about 15 mining sites. There was not a single POS or other anchorable structure in system, and nothing showing on wormnav for activity over the last week.
A speed buff coupled with weapons range nerf means less pvp. Short range weapons become almost useless in a Black Hole effect. If you use long-range weapons to compensate that also typically mean less dps. So even when you can apply damage, it takes much longer to do the same amount of damage to a target. This gives the target more time to escape, which is easier to do because of % velocity buff. Oh, wait. Higher velocity also means more damage mitigation. Even worse, your locking range is reduced. So you have even less time to fight before they get out of range.
Take a missile ship with a missile range about the same as its locking range under normal circumstances. In a C6 black hole, (easy math) its effective missile range is nerfed 25% and locking range 50%, further reducing missile range to locking range. Then you reduce applied dps by 50% because of the velocity bonus to the target.
Compared to normal space, your damage applied to the target is halved, and then your time available to apply that dps is halved again because of the range nerf. A missile ship's damage over time is reduced by as much as 75%!
Turrets suffer similarly, though to a lesser extent because of how transversal figures into the turret damage formula, and the need to spiral out, increasing time spent within locking range and reducing total damage mitigation.
I also want to point out that a falloff reduction unfairly effects certain turret systems (projectiles) more than others (lasers/rails). Why no optimal reduction? Light gets warped by high gravitational effects, too.
Here is my solution. First, dump all the range nerfs. All they do is discourage combat. Replace them with weapon effectiveness buffs to counter all that damage mitigation from the velocity buff. Leave the inertia effect unless it proves too unwieldy. I leave the exact mix to CCP devs. But my inclination is to follow the same progression as the velocity bonus. +100% explosion velocity and +100% tracking in a C6. +25% to each in a C1.
Now here is the fun part. Make every system on the test server a class 6 Black Hole for testing purposes and announce it loudly. I expect small ships should enjoy the environment while not being overwhelmingly OP. Free Ripley Weaver! |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
69
|
Posted - 2014.01.13 17:32:00 -
[225] - Quote
Let's be honest - we've all stared at the black hole graphic just a little too long and thought about it just a little too much. It happens and it's nothing to be ashamed of.
Ignore the test winmatar fan. Black Holes are wonderful. It takes like a week and a half for the guy I'm tackling to get aligned and get away. If you don't like the effects of the wh - move on / roll it.
Bane likes grapes, but won't touch a big dill pickle (I've tried, beleive me I have). Should we change big dill pickles just because Bane doesn't like them - heck no. Bane just says "No thanks dude" and moves on. We should all take Bane's lead when encountering a pickle we don't like - just move on. I've never counted all the wh in eve, but I would guess there are like more than 600, so there are plenty of options out there.
Me.... I love a big dill pickle and I love a black hole.
|
Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland Test Alliance Please Ignore
470
|
Posted - 2014.01.13 18:17:00 -
[226] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:Let's be honest - we've all stared at the black hole graphic just a little too long and thought about it just a little too much. It happens and it's nothing to be ashamed of.
Ignore the test winmatar fan. Black Holes are wonderful. It takes like a week and a half for the guy I'm tackling to get aligned and get away. If you don't like the effects of the wh - move on / roll it.
Bane likes grapes, but won't touch a big dill pickle (I've tried, beleive me I have). Should we change big dill pickles just because Bane doesn't like them - heck no. Bane just says "No thanks dude" and moves on. We should all take Bane's lead when encountering a pickle we don't like - just move on. I've never counted all the wh in eve, but I would guess there are like more than 600, so there are plenty of options out there.
Me.... I love a big dill pickle and I love a black hole.
I hate minmatar ships. I have flown them all of 5 times in 5 years. One was a shuttle. But that doesn't mean I can ignore an obviously unbalanced mechanic.
However, I just noticed something. Contrary to https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Wormhole_environment_effects#Black_Hole, EFT shows black holes do effect optimal. So all that stuff I said about it can be ignored.
Also, does this mean you like sticking your dill in a black hole? Free Ripley Weaver! |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
69
|
Posted - 2014.01.13 18:47:00 -
[227] - Quote
I will confirm that Bane likes grapse. |
Bane Nucleus
Sky Fighters
728
|
Posted - 2014.01.13 20:03:00 -
[228] - Quote
This conversation makes me very uncomfortable. No trolling please |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
69
|
Posted - 2014.01.13 20:12:00 -
[229] - Quote
You always say that. Relax... Have a pickle. |
Balanah
Quebec's Underdog League Quebec United Legions
24
|
Posted - 2014.01.25 13:55:00 -
[230] - Quote
JUST ACTIVATE THE GRAVITY PULL DAMN IT! _______________ Wormhole animal. |
|
grassy 420
Boris Johnson's Love Children Awakened.
12
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 18:58:00 -
[231] - Quote
would love to see it have something postive to it. also it is such a bad wh that i hate scanning them. usually loaded with sigs. to the point where i find myself not having the motivation to scan out 30 sigs and then move on the the next wormhole.
tbh i don't really care what is done to black holes as long as they get a positive change. right now they arn't ideal for killing sleepers. arn't ideal for pvp. and arn't ideal to live in.
That being said. Why wouldn't i just roll it and move on to a more suitable chain. if i don't have the option to roll it. then it has the potiental to kill wh content. |
Moloney
Doobie Den
26
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 10:03:00 -
[232] - Quote
Leave blackholes as they are please. They are different to others as much as others are different from the rest.
If you can tell me that there are 0 blackholes occupied then there may be a need for change. That is not the case. Blackholes are occupied. |
Justin Cody
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
91
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 21:16:00 -
[233] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:Let's be honest - we've all stared at the black hole graphic just a little too long and thought about it just a little too much. It happens and it's nothing to be ashamed of.
Ignore the test winmatar fan. Black Holes are wonderful. It takes like a week and a half for the guy I'm tackling to get aligned and get away. If you don't like the effects of the wh - move on / roll it.
Bane likes grapes, but won't touch a big dill pickle (I've tried, beleive me I have). Should we change big dill pickles just because Bane doesn't like them - heck no. Bane just says "No thanks dude" and moves on. We should all take Bane's lead when encountering a pickle we don't like - just move on. I've never counted all the wh in eve, but I would guess there are like more than 600, so there are plenty of options out there.
Me.... I love a big dill pickle and I love a black hole.
there are 2,498 different wormhole systems in EVE.
But nice guess. |
Tul Breetai
Impromptu Asset Requisition Insurance Fraud.
655
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 21:29:00 -
[234] - Quote
Yeah, it says lock range but it means optimal. There's nothing worse than an EVE player, generally considered to be top of the food chain in the MMO world, that cannot smacktalk with wit and coherency. |
Freddie Merrcury
Daktaklakpak. Red Coat Conspiracy
39
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 02:45:00 -
[235] - Quote
Moloney wrote:Leave blackholes as they are please. They are different to others as much as others are different from the rest.
If you can tell me that there are 0 blackholes occupied then there may be a need for change. That is not the case. Blackholes are occupied. I lived in a C3 black hole for a month because I was bored.
I can without a doubt tell you that they are ****.
They are the only Wormhole effect where literally every situation is worse to be in than a Vanilla. There is no benefit at all.
PVE is slower. PVP is worse because every ship type is made worse across the board by the effect.
I been kicked out of better homes than this. |
elise densi
Dark Amarr Ancestry
41
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 08:48:00 -
[236] - Quote
add a suckzone
nah change the graphic a little more blackholish
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/nustar/multimedia/pia16695.html#.UvyGmYVIUWI
graphic wise :) ^ |
elise densi
Dark Amarr Ancestry
41
|
Posted - 2014.02.13 08:50:00 -
[237] - Quote
P.S im looking for a WH corp
both into pve and pvp i can fly all amarr ships t1/t2 and have some past exp in c5/c6 wh's mainly pulsars looking for armor corp/alliance |
Nelly Uanos
Quebec's Underdog League Quebec United Legions
10
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 01:34:00 -
[238] - Quote
okst666 wrote:Nelly Uanos wrote:How about TiDi on 200% but no planet thus no moon. If you feel this isn't enough fun, add the 2 statics idea. no Moon => no POS => no residents => noone to blob
I think your underestimate the 200% TiDi...
Everything you will do will take HALF the time it normally take. Be it mining or anom.
Also people abusing these system won't have any POS to fall back at the first sign of trouble.
That's the reason I said no planets or moons also people doing industry stuff or PI at x2 the normal speed would be aka to cheating.
Maybe I would even prevent people from anchoring anything in these systems. (People living with their mobile depots)
Also it's realistic with the effect, everything anchored will get sucked up by the black hole!
Need to add that C6 would be 200% TiDi, scaling down as normal for lesser class. |
Tythihoz
Lycosa Syndicate Surely You're Joking
2
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 20:28:00 -
[239] - Quote
Ok I haven't been looking inside this post for ages, and right now I'm on the verge of collapsing to bed. But one thing that I find quite intriguing would be to add to the mass of all ships inside the Black Hole systems. Due to the gravity from the Black Hole all ships should get 20-40% added mass. Now this would make it interesting for capitals. When you jump form a non-Black Hole system into a Black Hole mass is ordinary, but once inside mass is multiplied by whatever % should be decided. This could ofcourse make some of the dreads become forever stuck inside... |
Lakshata Chawla
Blue-Fire
91
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 21:02:00 -
[240] - Quote
Tythihoz wrote:Ok I haven't been looking inside this post for ages, and right now I'm on the verge of collapsing to bed. But one thing that I find quite intriguing would be to add to the mass of all ships inside the Black Hole systems. Due to the gravity from the Black Hole all ships should get 20-40% added mass. Now this would make it interesting for capitals. When you jump form a non-Black Hole system into a Black Hole mass is ordinary, but once inside mass is multiplied by whatever % should be decided. This could ofcourse make some of the dreads become forever stuck inside... I know eve breaks physics, but I don't think they'd break the law of conservation of matter. |
|
Kalel Nimrott
Sky Fighters
788
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 21:31:00 -
[241] - Quote
Fastest warp and slower sublight speeds. My opinions are not my own. They come from the consensus of my corp. So, suck it. |
Chitsa Jason
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
1163
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 21:35:00 -
[242] - Quote
Just want to add my 2ISK here. CCP has been provided with links to this thread during the summit, so everything you post here is gonna get considered and talked about. CSM8 Member Twitter:-á@ChitsaJason Skype: Casparas
|
Sum Olgy
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
55
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 21:45:00 -
[243] - Quote
As others have said - make Black Holes worth living in or at least being in - give them a bonus to PI or extra spawns or WH moon goo or guaranteed Ghost Sites or something.
Perhaps guaranteed ghost sites but no moons?
Anything that'll make people want to fight over them, despite the fact the actual fighting is painful. Greed is good, as is pvp. |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1283
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 11:20:00 -
[244] - Quote
Make any supercapital in normal space that warps or passes durign warp within 1au of a wormhoel to a black hoel be sucked in and stay there stuck.. forever... "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Lloyd Roses
Blue-Fire
518
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 11:34:00 -
[245] - Quote
Tythihoz wrote:Due to the gravity from the Black Hole all ships should get 20-40% added mass.
oO - Density increases. "I honestly thought I was in lowsec"
Moving pictures: The Enyo |
Kaban Bastanold
The Motley Few
6
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 13:55:00 -
[246] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:Just want to add my 2ISK here. CCP has been provided with links to this thread during the summit, so everything you post here is gonna get considered and talked about.
Can you let us know if we get referenced somehow, It would be nice to know if we had input. |
Chitsa Jason
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
1164
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 14:18:00 -
[247] - Quote
Kaban Bastanold wrote:Chitsa Jason wrote:Just want to add my 2ISK here. CCP has been provided with links to this thread during the summit, so everything you post here is gonna get considered and talked about. Can you let us know if we get referenced somehow, It would be nice to know if we had input.
If that happens sure I will. CSM8 Member Twitter:-á@ChitsaJason Skype: Casparas
|
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
170
|
Posted - 2014.02.19 18:52:00 -
[248] - Quote
Lloyd Roses wrote:Tythihoz wrote:Due to the gravity from the Black Hole all ships should get 20-40% added mass.
oO - Density increases.
That would be a huge pain in the ***.
Also, what happens to the POS's in black holes if the moons get removed?
Missile bonus is the only thing that makes sense with the current effects. CCP could just remove black hole effects and add in something completely new. It would open up a wider range of possibilities than trying to find something that makes sense in a black hole. |
Proclus Diadochu
Obstergo Red Coat Conspiracy
1231
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 05:04:00 -
[249] - Quote
Alright, guys... Been giving this some thought, and came up with an idea. I bounced this off some of the guys in alliance, and it seems to not sound crazy, so before I write an article about my "crazy" idea, thought I'd ask you guys.
Black holes, as it seems, have a strange effect on Morphite which causes some interesting effects:
Black Hole Wormhole Effects
Affected Stat C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 T2 Armor HP (+24%)(+44%)(+55%)(+68%)(+85%)(+100%) T2 Shield HP (+24%)(+44%)(+55%)(+68%)(+85%)(+100%) T2 Specific Bonus (+24%)(+44%)(+55%)(+68%)(+85%)(+100%) Heat Damage (+10%)(+19%)(+27%)(+34%)(+41%)(+50%) Repair/Shield Boost Amount(-10%)(-19%)(-27%)(-34%)(-41%)(-50%)
So this idea would increase T2 ships in Black holes, however would impact heat damage, and also local reps (because Marauders would get busted). Any thoughts? CSM9 Candidate | Twitter: @autoritare | Gmail: [email protected] Campaign Thread: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=325889 Wormhole Discussion: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326273 |
Karen Galeo
Sin Factory Infinite Anarchy
5
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 05:47:00 -
[250] - Quote
That does not sound crazy, but how easy would it be for CCP to designate which hulls get which bonus? I do not know enough about how the ship object database works to be able to tell if that one is feasible, but it is interesting. ^^ Even if I can;t fly T2's quite yet.
On the other side, we have wormholes that buff light weapons... what if we had a wormhole that buffed the large turrets and cruise missiles? Author of the Karen 162 blog. Karen Galeo is running for CSM9! |
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Awakened.
1411
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 09:05:00 -
[251] - Quote
Proclus Diadochu wrote: Stuff about T2 ships
That's pretty cray cray.
All ccp needs to do to "fix" black hole systems is turn the negative weapons related bonuses to positive (e.g. C6 wormholes give a 50% increase to optimal and falloff). +1 |
Glyndi
Doom Generation THE H0NEYBADGER
169
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 09:21:00 -
[252] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Proclus Diadochu wrote: Stuff about T2 ships That's pretty cray cray. All ccp needs to do to "fix" black hole systems is turn the negative weapons related bonuses to positive (e.g. C6 wormholes give a 50% increase to optimal and falloff).
I'm with Rek on this one. Seems like it could be easiest to just reverse the current stats. You'd move like a brick but hit and at a longer range |
Janeway84
Masters Of Destiny Pride Before Fall
78
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 12:15:00 -
[253] - Quote
Proclus Diadochu wrote:Alright, guys... Been giving this some thought, and came up with an idea. I bounced this off some of the guys in alliance, and it seems to not sound crazy, so before I write an article about my "crazy" idea, thought I'd ask you guys.
Black holes, as it seems, have a strange effect on Morphite which causes some interesting effects:
Black Hole Wormhole Effects
Affected Stat C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 T2 Armor HP (+24%)(+44%)(+55%)(+68%)(+85%)(+100%) T2 Shield HP (+24%)(+44%)(+55%)(+68%)(+85%)(+100%) T2 Specific Bonus (+24%)(+44%)(+55%)(+68%)(+85%)(+100%) Heat Damage (+10%)(+19%)(+27%)(+34%)(+41%)(+50%) Repair/Shield Boost Amount(-10%)(-19%)(-27%)(-34%)(-41%)(-50%)
So this idea would increase T2 ships in Black holes, however would impact heat damage, and also local reps (because Marauders would get busted). Any thoughts?
Looks like some intresting stats def. a unique set of bonuses
Although would be cool with a wh that gave a boost to large guns and missiles like some one mentioned above. Maybe if if could be added somewhere.. |
Proclus Diadochu
Obstergo Red Coat Conspiracy
1232
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 13:28:00 -
[254] - Quote
Glyndi wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Proclus Diadochu wrote: Stuff about T2 ships That's pretty cray cray. All ccp needs to do to "fix" black hole systems is turn the negative weapons related bonuses to positive (e.g. C6 wormholes give a 50% increase to optimal and falloff). I'm with Rek on this one. Seems like it could be easiest to just reverse the current stats. You'd move like a brick but hit and at a longer range
I don't know, bro. I want people to want to move into Black holes. Moving like a brick sounds like a pretty good deterrent. But, it still sounds better to me than an industrial wormhole, but then again, some people enjoy that part of the game and may support an industrial style. I just felt that the T2 bonus scheme was something that would excite me about the systems...
Just trying to get out of the box, and I'm not sure how difficult it would be to be able to check [yes] it's a T2, therefore add bonuses. It also seems like an idea that would encourage more to move into the lower class blackholes? CSM9 Candidate | Twitter: @autoritare | Gmail: [email protected] Campaign Thread: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=325889 Wormhole Discussion: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326273 |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Awakened.
1414
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 13:47:00 -
[255] - Quote
Proclus Diadochu wrote: Just trying to get out of the box, and I'm not sure how difficult it would be to be able to check [yes] it's a T2, therefore add bonuses. It also seems like an idea that would encourage more to move into the lower class blackholes?
During the Chitsas Wormhole meeting last week, while people were talking about their ideas for wormhole space, i found my self thinking "would CCP actually be willing to do this?" and IMO the answer was often "no". I think your proposal falls into that category. If we want any changes to wormhole space, we need to keep it simple and not too resource intensive.
Let's say they did change it to the way i describes, yes you would still turn like a boat but you would be very fast and would have the damage projection to kite effectively. T2 hull would be king in this type of wormhole anyway as they are naturally faster and more agile than T3 hulls.
Damn i'm good... maybe i should run for CSM +1 |
Proclus Diadochu
Obstergo Red Coat Conspiracy
1232
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 13:53:00 -
[256] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Proclus Diadochu wrote: Just trying to get out of the box, and I'm not sure how difficult it would be to be able to check [yes] it's a T2, therefore add bonuses. It also seems like an idea that would encourage more to move into the lower class blackholes?
During the Chitsas Wormhole meeting last week, while people were talking about their ideas for wormhole space, i found my self thinking "would CCP actually be willing to do this?" and IMO the answer was often "no". I think your proposal falls into that category. If we want any changes to wormhole space, we need to keep it simple and not too resource intensive. Let's say they did change it to the way i describes, yes you would still turn like a boat but you would be very fast and would have the damage projection to kite effectively. T2 hull would be king in this type of wormhole anyway as they are naturally faster and more agile than T3 hulls. Damn i'm good... maybe i should run for CSM
I don't disagree that your idea had it's merit and should be relatively easy to implement. However, I'm not going to dismiss ideas just because I think that CCP might say "no". I also won't dismiss ideas just because they may be difficult or take time to implement. Also, unless you are a programmer, I don't think either of us can posit the resource intensity of any of these changes outside of our "guessing", which leads back to my point that I'd push for good ideas regardless of how simple or complex they sound...
You should just vote for me instead CSM9 Candidate | Twitter: @autoritare | Gmail: [email protected] Campaign Thread: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=325889 Wormhole Discussion: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326273 |
Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland Test Alliance Please Ignore
594
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 13:55:00 -
[257] - Quote
All T2 items are meta 5. So its just a matter of checking if(metaLevel==5){gib bonii}.
As far as adjusting those wormhole effects, I can't imagine it would be much harder. Mass and range are also just numbers in a database. Modifying them should pose no trouble.
The big question is whether the changes are acceptable to both CCP and players. Free Ripley Weaver! |
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
328
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 15:28:00 -
[258] - Quote
It seems like CCP intended Black Holes to be high-speed brawl systems maybe? The specific bonuses and penalties also make PvE harder and more skill-intensive, but that's just too bad. Systems where you have to get up close and personal before throwing stones at each other is quite nice :)
If that was the case, where the design failed was not accounting for the increased speeds with application of damage. Increase tracking and explosion velocity relative to speed increase. Because there is effectively a system-wide sensor dampener in effect, remote sensor damps should also not work, whether ship-based or POS module. |
Henry Cummings
Rapax.Legion
32
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 16:03:00 -
[259] - Quote
Let's not make black hole effect systems systems to buff t2s in comparison to the t3 meta. T2 ships need to stand on their own two feet, without a crutch. The entire suggestion just seems reminiscent of a bigger problem: t3 ships vs t2 ships.
Suppose t3s are, in the future, nerfed to the ground and t2 ships are buffed, or even stay as they are. (Not saying ccp would do this but for the sake of arguement let's suppose)
Suddenly, black holes are the only system worth a damn in an ironic perversion of the current meta. Let's avoid that. |
Proclus Diadochu
Obstergo Red Coat Conspiracy
1233
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 16:19:00 -
[260] - Quote
Henry Cummings wrote:Let's not make black hole effect systems systems to buff t2s in comparison to the t3 meta. T2 ships need to stand on their own two feet, without a crutch. The entire suggestion just seems reminiscent of a bigger problem: t3 ships vs t2 ships.
Suppose t3s are, in the future, nerfed to the ground and t2 ships are buffed, or even stay as they are. (Not saying ccp would do this but for the sake of arguement let's suppose)
Suddenly, black holes are the only system worth a damn in an ironic perversion of the current meta. Let's avoid that.
Henry, you have your scope too narrow. I'm not suggesting that this is the best idea either, however it is diverse, and also doesn't take away the virtues of the other non-vanilla wormholes. It would mean that T2's would fair better against T3's in those holes, and this is based on the current mechanics. Noone argues that T3's could use improvements, but the only nerf I'd see CCP implementing would be HP, but even with a marginal HP nerf, most T3's would still be comparable even in this type of wormhole environment. So this wouldn't break anything and surely wouldn't make Blackholes the only system worth anything. Let's not get dramatic, bro.
I'm working on a thing with my overall T3 discussion. A ton has to do with the perception, direction, and meta of T3's and where proposals "could" go to better those things. Let's see how that discussion goes as we continue the necro'd Blackhole one :) CSM9 Candidate | Twitter: @autoritare | Gmail: [email protected] Campaign Thread: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=325889 Wormhole Discussion: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326273 |
|
cpt Mark
The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Heiian Conglomerate
3
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 17:07:00 -
[261] - Quote
Ships near the black hole should be sucked in depending on mass and ship velocity (some ships like frigs etc should be able to escape from closer to the black hole)
POS structures should require additional anchoring to prevent them being sucked in.
Ships warping past the black hole should be thrown off course into dead space, taking shield damage.
Stars being sucked into black holes should release solar flares that blow out shields and capacitor in all syst |
Henry Cummings
Rapax.Legion
32
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 19:11:00 -
[262] - Quote
Proclus Diadochu wrote:
Henry, you have your scope too narrow. I'm not suggesting that this is the best idea either, however it is diverse, and also doesn't take away the virtues of the other non-vanilla wormholes. It would mean that T2's would fair better against T3's in those holes, and this is based on the current mechanics. Noone argues that T3's could use improvements, but the only nerf I'd see CCP implementing would be HP, but even with a marginal HP nerf, most T3's would still be comparable even in this type of wormhole environment. So this wouldn't break anything and surely wouldn't make Blackholes the only system worth anything. Let's not get dramatic, bro.
I'm working on a thing with my overall T3 discussion. A ton has to do with the perception, direction, and meta of T3's and where proposals "could" go to better those things. Let's see how that discussion goes as we continue the necro'd Blackhole one :)
While t2 ships being inferior to t3s, in general, is a commonly exhibited phenomena in wormhole space, making ships better only in 'certain' situations would be a mistake.
My example was intended to display the worst possible outcome of your suggestion. I do not see it happening, but it still displays what I dislike about your suggestion; empowering certain ships by the merit of them being terrible in comparison to other ships rather than just looking objectively at t2 and t3 ships themselves.
Another problem is the 'current mechanics' point, which is at best unnoteworthy, and at worst downright dangerous. With t3s soon(tm) to undergo a revamp, changing black holes to introduce alternatives to t3s seems silly, and if they are not looked at again after the rebalance, the wormhole community may find itself in a poor situation where this debate will happen yet again.
Another reason I find conflict with your idea is that it seems like a 'waste' of a wormhole effect, especially when so many interesting other ideas have already been proposed. Why waste a wormhole slot balancing ships when we could enjoy far more interesting (and day I say, fun) effects?
While it may be argued that this already happens with other wormhole effects (e.g. Wolf Rayet, Pulsar, CC), I'd like to make the distinction that these effects instead promote a certain type of gameplay rather than just certain ships, which encourages a variety of playstyles to take place.
A good example of this are pulsars. Shield is favoured there when armour isn't (as in the rest of W-Space) which leads to shield-interested groups settling there and successfully challenging armour-oriented groups on occasion. Pulsars also at least have an equivalent counterpart in armour, where a fleet would be hard-pressed to engage with a shield comp in that system.
In contrast, your black hole idea does not display the same level of flexibility, and certainly is not as diverse as you claim, with only certain ships falling into that category and given arbitrary damage boosts to make up for their shortcomings. My perfect situation would be that where t2 ships are given boosts or t3 ships given nerfs in order to make t2 ships a viable alternative to the old standard of armour t3s across all wormholes, not just wasting them on just black holes.
This is just my two cents. I hope my more general explanation of affairs eliminated the conception of my narrow-mindedness, as I can assure I think long and hard before I post anything.
That includes the shitposts
|
Proclus Diadochu
Obstergo Red Coat Conspiracy
1235
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 19:42:00 -
[263] - Quote
So, you mean like a Wolf-Rayet that provides bonus to small weaponry, therefore shows bias to Frigs and Destroyers? I am not saying that I disagree that T3's need rebalancing, but to suggest that a wormhole effect providing bonuses to a particular class would break anything, I'm going to say that I don't agree with you. This I don't believe this idea will break the game and just like an already existing wormhole class that favors one type of ship over another, will provide positives that would bring players to want to live in them.
That said, the idea to just fix the weapon "bonuses" would probably fix that hindrance just as easily, or even easier. I don't know. If anything, I still think that my idea is oodles better than an industrial wormhole... CSM9 Candidate | Twitter: @autoritare | Gmail: [email protected] Campaign Thread: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=325889 Wormhole Discussion: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326273 |
Henry Cummings
Rapax.Legion
32
|
Posted - 2014.03.15 00:49:00 -
[264] - Quote
Proclus Diadochu wrote:
So, you mean like a Wolf-Rayet that provides bonus to small weaponry, therefore shows bias to Frigs and Destroyers?
Again, I think a distinction must be made; this time between the synergy between a wolf-rayet's bonuses and those of your suggested black hole bonuses.
Wolf-Rayets have one (1) bonus specific to only certain ship classes. This bonus is relatively small; a 50% to small weapons is, in absolute (non-percentage) terms, a small increase in dps and has little to no effect on the viability of small-hardpointed ships in a wolf-rayet. It is, more or less, a 'flavour enhancer' that takes advantage of the sig size bonus, which happens to be granted to all of the ships in that wormhole. It has little effect on the overall viability of fleet comps in wolf-rayet systems, but instead allows for more, fun options, like destroyers and assault frigates to be used very successfully againt ABC fleets. It gives them an extra little 'flavour boost'.
Your suggestion, on the other hand, has three (3) gigantic, across-the-board bonuses to only one class of ship, out of (5) bonuses, with one (1) other added, as you say, to make another type of t2 ship viable, bringing us to 4 out of 5 bonuses for a specific type of ship, with one 'flavour' bonus added in. In this way I do not think wolf-rayet bonuses and your suggested black hole bonuses are comparable, and should not be treated as such.
Proclus Diadochu wrote: I am not saying that I disagree that T3's need rebalancing, but to suggest that a wormhole effect providing bonuses to a particular class would break anything, I'm going to say that I don't agree with you.
I shall reiterate; it is only in the worst possible scenario your suggested effects will 'break' anything.
Henry Cummings wrote: My example was intended to display the worst possible outcome of your suggestion.
It is in the principle of your proposal in which I disagree; t2 ships must be allowed to stand on their own two feet and be viable in all of w-space, not just in black holes. I personally do enjoy flying t2 ships, but often don't get such a chance when t3s are the way to go. I appreciate your sentiment of making t2 compositions a viable alternative to t3 compositions, but this is not the way it should be done. Black holes should have other, more general effects that will have a tangible effect on all ships, which almost all current wormholes have (red giants don't really have much effect).
Trust me, proc. I want to mess around in eagle fleets as much as the next guy, but this is not the way to do it. nerf t3s(correctly, but I don't want to get into this) and allow the glorious beagle to roam free in any wormhole by its own merit, rather than because of 3 arbitrary buffs that will apply only occasionally.
Proclus Diadochu wrote: If anything, I still think that my idea is oodles better than an industrial wormhole...
Looks like we're in agreement, then. |
Leah-Ayrn
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2014.03.15 13:18:00 -
[265] - Quote
Just a thought, but how about this: Black Holes keep the current effects regarding ship mobility, but give an positive bonus to drone usage (optimal, tracking, damage. pick one)
Currently only 2 effects specifically target drones, and both do so negatively. So how about a positive? While it might encourage PvE more than PvP, targets are targets. At least it would encourage people to get into the systems. Plus it could add a neat little layer into the meta; roll into a BlackHole and already know what weapon system you face, and know at the same time you'll be at a disadvantage.
Of course it may need refined, and figure out how to deal with carriers/fighters. But its an idea. |
Anize Oramara
S T R A T C O M Critical-Mass
148
|
Posted - 2014.03.15 14:47:00 -
[266] - Quote
I've been looking into Black holes from a purely cap escalation point of view and have noticed a few interesting things with the effects as they currently are.
To run cap escalations the most efficiently requires Moroses. Naglfars are no slouches but at all 5 skills they just can't compete with the close range dps of a moros.
An interesting thing happens in a Black hole though.
Naglfars, because they rely more heavily on Falloff and because they have so many more mids they can nearly ignore one of the negative effect of these wormholes. Suddenly Naglfars are far superior to Moroses when running these sites.
That said you still lose over 2k dps at the 36km orbiting range but that's nothing compared to the nearly 5k a Moros loses, not to mention the horrible projection at further ranges. The difference between a Nag and Moros just grows after that.
This has actually got me thinking, why do people REALLY hate black holes so much? With this new information I would like to put forward that the real reason is pretty simple.
Because people are unable or too lazy to adapt.
Regardless, from what we've seen there are enough unoccupied normal C5s out there that I have not heard a single valid argument against BHs existing considering you can cap escalate at 80-85% efficiency.
In fact, with how many sites are clogged up in BHs at the moment I can't understand why people aren't flooding them as we speak.
Granted this IS only from a cap escalation POV but we have run enough C3-C4 BHs to see that they are also easily adapted to and in fact with certain tactics can even run them FASTER than normal because of the increase in ship speed. (Think blasters)
I wouldn't advocate for a boost in drone or missiles to help boost lower class BH wormholes simply because all other sub C5 WHs are currently already run most efficiently with these two weapon systems (RR Tengus and Domis)
Perhaps BHs shouldn't be changed at all, rather the people living in wormholes should be the ones that should get off their fat, lazy asses and change. |
Traba Regina
Serene Vendetta
9
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 00:25:00 -
[267] - Quote
Why not make the so called Black hole have more chance of wondering K-space connections? might link the various classes up a little bit more than atm.
Or a bonus all be it reduced similar to Wolf Rayat and cataclysmic so shield and armo are a little boosted. maybe 50% of a rayat? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=225281&find=unread Join Serene Vendetta now! |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
5
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 09:21:00 -
[268] - Quote
I'd prefer something like this:
Ship velocity +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50% Inertia +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50% Repair amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100% Shield boost amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100% Shield transfer amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50% Remote repair amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50% Capacitor recharge +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50%
- I like the speed/inertia changes in black holes, as of right now they are simply too strong - there is no effect that promotes active boosting in pvp in particular - to counter local-rep-boost for pve-activities (cap escalations especially) capacitor needs to be nerfed
Edit: Yes, marauders would be even more overpowered in such a hole. But there is counters to everything, amirite ... |
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
6065
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 13:13:00 -
[269] - Quote
This is a slightly out there idea, but give wormholes natural tidi, with level of tidi going up with system class. This adds some really interesting pvp dynamic, since things are slowed down so much. Could even like, if the second stellar body was ever added as a physical place in the systems instead of just being background, make tidi more and more intense as you get closer to the black hole (dunno how technically feasible this is)
I like the maneuvering changes that black holes generate, I just think they need something more.
Torn from grace, gotta find your faith or the devils gonna claim your soul
|
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
5
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 14:31:00 -
[270] - Quote
Saede Riordan wrote:This is a slightly out there idea, but give wormholes natural tidi, with level of tidi going up with system class. This adds some really interesting pvp dynamic, since things are slowed down so much. Could even like, if the second stellar body was ever added as a physical place in the systems instead of just being background, make tidi more and more intense as you get closer to the black hole (dunno how technically feasible this is)
I like the maneuvering changes that black holes generate, I just think they need something more.
excellent trolling! |
|
Henry Cummings
Rapax.Legion
32
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 22:50:00 -
[271] - Quote
Ab'del Abu wrote:I'd prefer something like this:
Ship velocity +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50% Inertia +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50% Repair amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100% Shield boost amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100% Shield transfer amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50% Remote repair amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50% Capacitor recharge +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50%
- I like the speed/inertia changes in black holes, as of right now they are simply too strong - there is no effect that promotes active boosting in pvp in particular - to counter local-rep-boost for pve-activities (cap escalations especially) capacitor needs to be nerfed
Edit: Yes, marauders would be even more overpowered in such a hole. But there is counters to everything, amirite ...
I'm liking this idea. CC's have no opposite hole. It would also make pve much easier for very small groups, and encourage daytripping. |
The Cue
Applied Agoraphobia
15
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 23:34:00 -
[272] - Quote
Henry Cummings wrote:Ab'del Abu wrote:I'd prefer something like this:
Ship velocity +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50% Inertia +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50% Repair amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100% Shield boost amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100% Shield transfer amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50% Remote repair amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50% Capacitor recharge +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50%
- I like the speed/inertia changes in black holes, as of right now they are simply too strong - there is no effect that promotes active boosting in pvp in particular - to counter local-rep-boost for pve-activities (cap escalations especially) capacitor needs to be nerfed
Edit: Yes, marauders would be even more overpowered in such a hole. But there is counters to everything, amirite ... I'm liking this idea. CC's have no opposite hole. It would also make pve much easier for very small groups, and encourage daytripping. I don't know that they need the velocity inertial numbers, since Cataclysmics don't have anything else, but I agree, I'd love for this to be implemented. I know I've suggested that black holes become the opposite of a Cataclysmic, and I doubt I was the first either, so there's a lot of support behind this idea I suspect. |
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
238
|
Posted - 2014.03.17 15:05:00 -
[273] - Quote
The Cue wrote: Ship velocity +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50% Inertia +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50% Repair amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100% Shield boost amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100% Shield transfer amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50% Remote repair amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50% Capacitor recharge +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50% .
So if you want to run cap escalations in these black holes your going to use mauraders? Local tanked T3s?
Current effects may limit people's willingness to live in these holes - but who's going to move into a hole where the bonuses actively discourage teamwork? |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
6
|
Posted - 2014.03.17 17:27:00 -
[274] - Quote
Noxisia Arkana wrote:The Cue wrote: Ship velocity +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50% Inertia +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50% Repair amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100% Shield boost amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100% Shield transfer amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50% Remote repair amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50% Capacitor recharge +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50% .
So if you want to run cap escalations in these black holes your going to use mauraders? Local tanked T3s? Current effects may limit people's willingness to live in these holes - but who's going to move into a hole where the bonuses actively discourage teamwork?
You can still run capital escalations, but you'd need to adapt fittings and fleet setups indeed (e.g. less local reps, more cap ...). Remote reps are ~only~ halved in C6s, that is something that could be compensated ;) marauders would probably die though ...
I do see your point, but: as I see it, all effects promote certain flavors of gameplay while discouraging others. Above proposal is something that both current AND future black-hole-systen inhabitants could appreciate - at least, I believe so. |
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
238
|
Posted - 2014.03.17 20:57:00 -
[275] - Quote
It promotes different playstyles.
I have to say: Living in W-space already means you are kinda a hermit. Having a C4 where you could easily solo (relatively) sites.. how's that promoting group play and pew (which are the main points we tend to make on the forum).
This effect would create the ultra hermit. The quintessential WH hermit crab. One guy, alts (for PI of course), and the ability to run sites solo with (more) ease.
Everything it does for daytrippers it doubles up on for the exact type of player the WH masses hate. The one guy that farms his hole all day long.
Of all the discussions (including those with black holes having an extra static) this is my least favorite suggestion. While it rewards day-trippers, it shines at making the best group content in eve drastically more difficult.
If ANY significant changes get made to black hole systems, corps that have invested heavily in those systems should get an option to have their junk pushed to a lowsec station. Some of these options will completely screw the playstyle of people already in blackholes. It would at least make that bitter pill a little easier to swallow. |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
6
|
Posted - 2014.03.18 10:19:00 -
[276] - Quote
Noxisia Arkana wrote:It promotes different playstyles.
I have to say: Living in W-space already means you are kinda a hermit. Having a C4 where you could easily solo (relatively) sites.. how's that promoting group play and pew (which are the main points we tend to make on the forum).
This effect would create the ultra hermit. The quintessential WH hermit crab. One guy, alts (for PI of course), and the ability to run sites solo with (more) ease.
Everything it does for daytrippers it doubles up on for the exact type of player the WH masses hate. The one guy that farms his hole all day long.
Of all the discussions (including those with black holes having an extra static) this is my least favorite suggestion. While it rewards day-trippers, it shines at making the best group content in eve drastically more difficult.
If ANY significant changes get made to black hole systems, corps that have invested heavily in those systems should get an option to have their junk pushed to a lowsec station. Some of these options will completely screw the playstyle of people already in blackholes. It would at least make that bitter pill a little easier to swallow.
The idea was that it would support solo pilots and micro-gangs that can't afford to bring extra logistics to pewpew, not running higher-class sites solo. My reasoning was further that the capacitor-nerf would limit pve-applicability... not sure how well that would work in light of cap boosters, I have to admit. |
Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland Test Alliance Please Ignore
598
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 15:31:00 -
[277] - Quote
Moving Black Holes to a missile-based bonus set would allow CCP to test the viability of increased damage application on the Phoenix in a much more controlled setting. Free Ripley Weaver! |
DetKhord Saisio
Seniors Clan The NME Alliance
48
|
Posted - 2014.03.26 02:36:00 -
[278] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:The effects have to be easy to understand and not require much dev time. Removing moons or adding drag might be a bit complicated. For those not familiar with the movie The Final Countdown (1980), a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier enters a "storm-like vortex" that sends the carrier back in time to Dec 6, 1942 (1 day prior to Pearl Harbor).
A RNG-warp tunnel at the center of a Black Hole wormhole sends you on a 1-way trip to a distant location. Aside from allowing a capital-class ship to enter highsec, basically you warp to the sun. Once you land on grid with the black hole 'sun', randomly you may find a 1-way hole has spawned on grid with you. Enter and it spits you out the other side and closes behind you.
Black Hole Systems having different bonuses (missiles, ecm, etc) would also be good. Just like a bit of run-down real estate in your neighborhood, 'flip this house' by sending in some contractors with granite countertops, hardwood/stone flooring, you get the idea. Ice was shot down, but essentially black holes need something to attract residents. Otherwise, empty space just for moving through is what black holes will remain.
There are no mining barges/exhumers with armor bonuses, but if that is coming down the pike any time soon (TM), adding something for attracting armor-bonused mining ships would be a start.
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
169
|
Posted - 2014.03.26 15:51:00 -
[279] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:Moving Black Holes to a missile-based bonus set would allow CCP to test the viability of increased damage application on the Phoenix in a much more controlled setting.
What?? So the only way they could test pheonix stuff is to change black holes on the live server?
You sir are either deviously brilliant... or whatever the opposite of that is. |
Tombomb13
PillowBrigade Inc Heiian Conglomerate
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 12:48:00 -
[280] - Quote
TL/DR: I think the problem relates to the effects on velocity and inertia. Every other effect in wormhole space affects ship performance, but the affect both of these effects have in this wormhole, with the exception of affecting a ships tracking performance because the target is moving faster, are related to pilot skill.
Chitsa Jason wrote: The effects have to be easy to understand and not require much dev time. Removing moons or adding drag might be a bit complicated.
A blackhole is what? Since you want to mimic a blackhole you would probably want to do something with ship movement. The current effects see ships accelerate, which suggests they would be heading towards a black hole. Generally we don't want to get torn up by a black hole, so we would try to get away from it. You could reduce the velocity and inertia in the hole by the same amounts that you have increased it. Maybe you should be creating the entirely opposite effect.
What currently happens, correct me if I am wrong: Every fight occurs at a closer range but a faster pace. Damage is harder to apply to the faster moving targets regardless of tracking.
Here are some situations I could see occurring with the current effects, please correct me if they are wrong:
1- The dwellers of a black hole should have the opportunity to use the effects of the hole to their advantage. Let me give you an example of the problem I can see with the current set up. If I am in a sniping naga living in a C6 blackhole, my optimal range and fall off is bad so I need to be twice as close. I can move faster which you would think is an advantage. However, since everything else can move faster, I get chased by an interceptor, who catches me as fast as he would in known space since we both have the bonus to speed and velocity and inertia, everything evens out in the end so it technically makes no difference - apart from pilot skill utilising their manoeuvrability and mobility. However, effects are supposed to affect the ships performance and not the pilots, right?. Going back to the example, it also becomes twice as hard for me to hit the interceptor because he's moving twice as fast.
2- I'm living in a C6 in a superbly armour tanked legion with an AB and close range blasters. I can't catch anything and I am a brawler. My situation doesn't change outside of the wormhole because everyone gets the same velocity and inertia bonus. The exception once again is that I will find it harder to hit my target. It just all happens at a faster rate so it's again down to pilot skill. The effects should affect the ships performance, not the pilots skill, right? Someone can kite me in known space just as well as they can in the wormhole and it's harder for me to hit them.
Here are four considerations, maybe some of this would be useful to think about:
1 - Right now we can be really fast, but our range is shot. So this would be really slow with poor range. I don't know how complicated it would be to implement this idea: You can vary this by ship mass. Greater masses result in greater velocity penalties. Lighter ships have a reduced effect. It would at least promote the idea of having to fit a particular type of ship, in this case a nano fitted ship stands to gain more here. I think the idea is to give the dwellers the opportunity to create unique fits that work well in their home.
2- If this is too complicated and you want something simpler then why not leave the velocity as it is and reverse the inertia entirely? You could try the opposite, leaving the inertia untouched and reverse the velocity effects.
3 - Could you increase the current effects as you get closer to the black hole in the centre of the wormhole, and decrease them further away?
4 - Apply a mass effect, but only for one of inertia or velocity. You can't do it by ship class because it would somewhat nullify ship race differences which is against the general mechanics. As with known space, if a ship is heavier it is slower and takes longer to turn. Your heavier ship is going to find it harder to manoeuvre.
5- I think this was just mentioned above, you could make ships more self sufficient in the harsh environment of a blackhole by providing boosts to self repairing. I'm not sure if you'd increase it to 100% for a C6 but maybe?. Edit: Someone just mentioned it above, thanks!:
Repair amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100% Shield boost amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100% |
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
177
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 13:03:00 -
[281] - Quote
Science is awesome. Black holes and the theories and all that stuff are also very interesting. For all you would be designers I'd just like to restate my high level objectives for any changes to black hole mechanics.
1) Most importantly that graphic has to be annimated and do something really special. quiver, pucker, contraction - it's got to have that 'must see' annimation.
2) It's a game and the whole crux of changing black hole systems is to make them more fun to play in. Keeping it toward the science of black holes is cool, but the fun to play in should be the over riding goal. I can't tell you what fun actually is, but I do know it when I see it.
My many thanks to you 'numbers guys' that are doing all this crunching - I'm just cautioning you to not be too geeky and forget the fun part while focusing on black hole theory and stuff.
For instance having an e-war randomizer effect would be fun, but have nothing to do with the science of black holes. Imagine activating your web and having it function like a radar ECM module or your tracking disruptor behaving like a sensor damp. Random e-war swappage would be great fun. A nightmare to deal with in real time, but hillarious in the post fight discussions.
Objective one must be accomplished for this to be a success and objective two needs the proper amount of consideration also. |
Tombomb13
PillowBrigade Inc Heiian Conglomerate
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 13:09:00 -
[282] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote: For instance having an e-war randomizer effect would be fun
It could be fun to test on the test server, however Pilots want to be rewarded for fitting their ship correctly. If an EFT warrior spends an hour fitting a ship only for the key EWAR related module to turn into something entirely differently, rendering their entire fit useless, then they would never go into that wormhole. As you said it's about getting people to live there, this would probably discourage that. I like your idea about make the black hold at the centre of the wormhole look nice :)
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
177
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 15:48:00 -
[283] - Quote
1 - Your condescension is laughable - you speak so freely of what others want, don't want, would like and wouldn't - get over yourself
2 - Your comprehension is laughable - I was kidding, putting something that was over the top to highlight that fun effects are the order of the day for black holes - you taking it literally as an idea for changing the game is kind of scary - you can't discern my meaning and intent yet are comfortable espousing what others would like and dislike. That's a dangerous combination.
3 - (Phil Collins flashback here) You never really knew me at all - I don't have EFT (Bane will verify) AND I don't come up with actual constructive ideas on the forums (ideals for sure, but ideas to change the game.... too much work).
4 - I don't like EFT warriors, so if this effect would ruin their sterile pristine world... well now I'm all for it. It's a game, so more playing and less theory crafting on a third party program is what I say. "Who's with me!?!" (that's Bill Murray in any number of motivational moments in any number of films he's done)
Lighten up Mr. Tombomb... lighten up |
Tombomb13
PillowBrigade Inc Heiian Conglomerate
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 18:54:00 -
[284] - Quote
Woah, take it easy there Ms. Lost I must have hit a nerve, take a step back from the screen maybe? :-)
At what point was I supposed to know you were only kidding. I don't claim to know what everyone wants, I'm only going off of people that I know - if I really need to state that so people don't get offended as you appear to have been then so be it. On EFT, because you seem to dislike it, I don't think I know any pilot that's not used it at least once?. Maybe using the term "EFT warriors" goes too far. It's laughable that you feel I need to know you and that you expect me to know your post is a joke.
I'll know from now on that you make these jokes if I happen to come across another post. I don't know you of course but that's not the point of it really, am I expected to know you?. Maybe you are a nice person, but the fact that you make a bunch of assumptions about me immediately after you picked out what you have wrongly translated as my attempts to make peoples minds up for them, is kind of contradictory.
Now that all of that is out of the way, Phil Colins can be cool, especially combined with the Cadbury's monkey drummer TV advert , I don't know Bane. I saw Bill Murray once, he was wearing a bright orange outfit playing golf in the town I study in, did I cover everything? :-)
If you are going to reply to this comment then that's cool. If I've pissed you off some more then I can't help that, it's not what I'm trying to do. Can't we all just get along? We both like spaceships, right?
Back to black holes to make this post relevant to the thread, another thought - If the current POS mechanics and corporation/alliance GUI panels for roles/admin were revamped - as many people have been crying out for - then it wormhole life could suddenly become more tempting for a lot of pilots to live in. If the wormhole population increases then black holes could become more inhabited as they are, even with minor tweaks. If they are the most undesirable of all wormhole types at this point, then you'd be less likely to be evicted, so that would be one advantage. |
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
269
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 19:12:00 -
[285] - Quote
People get evicted more because of some stupid comment than they do because someone actually wants the hole. |
Tombomb13
PillowBrigade Inc Heiian Conglomerate
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 19:13:00 -
[286] - Quote
Noxisia Arkana wrote:People get evicted more because of some stupid comment than they do because someone actually wants the hole. I can't argue with that! |
Phaade
Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF
156
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 22:46:00 -
[287] - Quote
Only ships of a certain size are allowed in the system.
FW favors small things, so have Black Hole systems favor big things.
Big enough black hole, only Battleships can enter. |
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
270
|
Posted - 2014.03.28 13:17:00 -
[288] - Quote
Phaade wrote:Only ships of a certain size are allowed in the system.
FW favors small things, so have Black Hole systems favor big things.
Big enough black hole, only Battleships can enter.
Interesting idea, but it'd be like a roadblock if you were trying to scan your way to HS in a covops. Scan down sig, attempt to jump through... get rejected. It'd also make those holes ludicrously safe as most roving PVP is done in cruiser (some BC) sized ships. Thus you could pretty much sit with your statics open and do whatever you wanted.
Not to mention, you could probably build cruisers/frigs in the wh, so you'd be the only one on the field with falcons, jamgus, guardians... etc. |
urfkd
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
2
|
Posted - 2014.03.29 05:37:00 -
[289] - Quote
Remove all the moons and increase the static count tenfold. Make them random.
Adjust the statics to a 6h/lifetime + variable mass allowance depending on the static's class.
Put one NPC station randomly with expensive services in it (Lore opportunities!) and allow markets to build up.
That would make them good PVP hubs, pave the way for more content, increase wormhole's popularity without killing k-space and increase the risk of living in w-space.
Now, when that stargate building thing comes along, why not allowing the player to build a stargate on top of a wormhole to perma-link his system with this hub? |
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 RETURN MINING INC. Illusion of Solitude
692
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 11:59:00 -
[290] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:Hello everyone,
I would like some feedback.
Do you think black holes need change of effect? If yes then what new effects would you propose?
Thank you for your answers!
Remove moons and otherwise Leave effects as they are but let them spawn 10 -15 additional wandering wormholes into other systems and also into k space that automatically activate/open without being warped to.
Turn them into wormhole superhubs
Good for travel, good for finding fights but very difficult to fight in leading to tracking and hunting mechanics taking priority, should liven things up nicely.
Edit I did not see ^^^ before posting, saying similar thing, seems more than a few thinking along the same lines. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
|
Dieter Rams
The Nommo Insurance Fraud.
61
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 21:34:00 -
[291] - Quote
Make all holes connecting to black holes spawn as EOL. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: [one page] |